Hedda Gabler is a play filled with tensions and the theme of power play. Personally, I feel that Hedda Gabler is a reflection of a woman trapped in the wrong time. She is one who wants power but is denied of it due to her gender and also her status in the society and all that she needs is to just sit at home and recieve visitors. She has no aims to look forward to and I believe that it is suffocating for this woman. If she had been born in this time of the century, I believe that she would not land up in that patathic end.

Hedda Gabler is a wonderful story of a woman desperately trying to have control over her life. Married to a husband she doesn't love and pregnant with a child she doesn't want, Hedda seeks comfort in an old friend. There are enough surprizes in this play to keep it interesting throughout. Ibsen uses his brilliant writing style to capture the very essence of Hedda. I highly recommend Hedda Gabler as well as other works by Henrik Ibsen.

Hedda Gabler lives in an absolute prison. Her idylic residence is a prison, her marriage to a hopeful "ilustrious intellectual" is a prison, but above all, she lives imprisoned by herself, trapped by the social parameters that demand her to live the way she does. Hedda just can't figure out how to get out of that tedious state. She's intelligent, cold, severe; Gabler has an almost prodigious capacity to obtain all the information she inquires about the people around her; she manipulates them, she seems to get involved, but she simply tries to take advantage of the situation. Apparently, she doesn't feel much, but in reality, Hedda is in constant turmoil - her involvement has to do, almost exclusively, with what she just cannot allow herself to do.

For this woman, being able to have some sort of "power" over someone becomes the most exciting of all experiences, however - there's a point when she no longer will be able to manipulate the situation on her favor, she will realize how many forces have power over her; therefore, she will simply do the most congruent and coherent of things, as unexpected and shocking as the outcome of this play could possibly be.

I do enjoy eddings work, good plot, but by god, he gets repetitive. Every character has to make some sort of dry crack after a fight "Are you okay?" "They arent." If I read "'Be nice' (character x) murmured" one more time, Im going to freak out. How can -every- person in the world use that phrase? Its getting to be boring formula. Same thing with "Oh, I do love you" (x) said, nestling her head into (blanks) neck". Once or twice, fine. 15- 20 times or more comes across as stilted and forced. It wouldnt be so bad if the Malloreon and other Belgarath books were the only ones like this, but the Sparhawk series is just like this too. Im having to force myself to finish this because the above problems are getting really distracting and aggravating. Good grief.

David Eddings is the master of fantasy. I have read the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. I have read so many fiction books that sometimes i confuse fantasy and reality but I know a great book when i read it and David Eddings books are just that. They have all the elements of fiction Magic, Sorcery, Intiuge, Creatures that exist nowhere else, and a world with a past and present so finely detailed that you swear its almost real... if you could only find the door. Some claim his books are predictable that good always wins but if some thing wasnt just a little bit predictable we would all probly take to our beds to frightened to go on.

We all belive Belgarion and the Orb will win and good will once again prevail but again and agian our minds fill with doubt as Eddings tests that belief. If we all wernt so fascinated with the series and the doubts it gives us we would have stopped reading long ago.

But we havent stopped .That alone speaks for it self.

i've been reading paperbacks (adventures, sci-fi, police stories, etc) for years now. but when i came across david edding's book 3 of the tamuli (the hidden city), i can hardly wait to locate our local bookstores for tamuli's book 1 and 2. when at long last i had them and read them, i hungered for more of david eddings. so i made sure i have the complete books of the elenium (diamond throne, ruby knight, sapphire rose). as i encountered the reader's comments on the belgariad and the malloreon, i think i still have so much to get from eddings (therefore saving a lot of money to buy the 10 sets! uggh). anyway, where else can you find the most wondrous of stories, the whims, the humors, written in the most easily understood words? I am so engrossed and influenced by the books that i borrowed the name of one of his characters in the elenium and tamuli--the mightiest name and the god of all gods--bhelliom. thank you mr. eddings, for giving us stories like those of yours, which we could pass onto our future children and grandchildren. Congratulations!!! Your works are more than a five-sta

The historical perspective that is the core of David's book makes the positions of the adversaries in the Kennewick Man dispute more understandable. I expected a telling of the controversy surrounding Kennewick Man, and perhaps some suggestions about what the remains mean to theories concerning the peopling of the New World. What I got was a lucid history of the stormy relationship between Native Americans and archaeologists that forms a good part of the background for the Kennewick Man controversy. David goes some distance (maybe too far)to be charitable to all the players in this scientific soap opera. He makes it clear, however, that Native American remains are part of Native American history and identity, not specimens to be mined for cranial measurements and loopy inferences about intellectual capability. I am left with a nagging question that David doesn't address, but is at the center of this controversy: how do we KNOW the affiliation of human remains? Surely NAGPRA can't ascertain affiliation, although it can apparently assign it. In the absence of some rigorous examination of remains by qualified individuals we are left with the prospect of conflicting claims that characterizes "Kennnewick Man: The Soap". If affiliation is determined by legislative fiat or dueling attorneys, we all lose. Classifying remains as Native American because they are found in North America does some violence to common sense - are Toyotas indigenous because we find them here? Vine DeLoria's views notwithstanding, the peopling of the New World remains a story to be told. It is possible that the Americas were peopled more than once by groups from parts of the world that conventional wisdom has long dismissed. David closes his book with the account of a collaborative project in Alaska that offers a real alternative to the disputes surrounding Kennewick Man. Hopefully such cooperation will be a model for archaeological research, and the picture of Native American prehistory that it renders will be more complete because of its inclusiveness. All in all, a superb read that encourages us to examine our motives and to recall the obscenities that have occurred in the past, and almost certainly will occur again, for "Science".

David Hurst Thomas has produced an amazing book in Skull Wars. It is at once a serious scholarly history of the relationship between archaeologists and Native Americans and at the same time a good read, accessible to an informed public. Thomas tells it like it is when it comes to this history. As he points out it is a history that archaeologist cannot be proud of. He does an excellent job of demonstrating how the colonial context of archaeology shaped the actions of scholars to bad ends, often despite their good intentions.

Those individuals who call for a more balanced account of this history only wish to deny or cover up the ugly truth. Thomas is if anything too kind to many of the key figures of early archaeology and in the recent Kennewick controversy. As Thomas argues archaeologists need to learn from this history and not simply hide behind naive good intentions. Thomas demonstrates how informed archaeologists can work with Native American people to build common ground and interests. He shows us how we can go beyond the controversy to link good intentions with good actions.

I cannot verify or deny Thomas' comments on the Asatru religion but the reviews that react so negatively to them are focusing in on only a couple of paragraphs in the book. These comments have little to do with the overall point of the book or its content. Virtually no professional archaeologists accept the idea that there is evidence for Norse or other European settlement or exploration in North American much before AD 900 or that these explorations extended beyond the east coast of Canada. Even the theory advanced by a few archaeologists that paleolithic Solutrian peoples from the Iberian Peninsula may have crossed the arctic ice to become the North American Clovis culture has been recently dismissed in American Antiquity.

As a professional archaeologist and a scholar who has written extensively on relationships between archaeologists and Native Americans I welcome this readable account. It is a book that should be read by anyone interested in North American archaeology and I hope that it will become required reading of all archaeology students.

Skull Wars is a superb read - engagingly written and forcefully presented - it has relevance well beyond the anthropological and Native American communities. Thomas'interweaving of history, American socio-political history and the emergence of social sciences as practiced in the US is fascinating. He's packed an amazing amount of research into this volume. I learned much and disagree with little. Coming to terms with the issue of race in this country is still in many ways largely intractable, but made much more complex by issues of class. When compounded with the Native American experience the complexities are even more magnified.

The issues confronted in Skull Wars are particularly germane for those Native American groups that have retained some semblance of generational continuity. Thomas accurately touches on the "top down" weaknesses of the implementation of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.

Thomas clearly articulates that there is not a one-size fits all approach to accommodating and reconciling the concerns of legitimately affected Native Americans and the archaeological community. The positive examples at the end of the book serve as models for much of the country.

I hope Skull Wars reaches the wide audience it deserves. I enthusiastically recommend it.

Are you already extremely knowledgeable about the French Revolution, with a detailed memory of all events and individuals involved? Are you uninterested in what has been said about the French Revolution in this century or the last? Did you find other 19th century accounts of the Revolution (e.g. those by Guizot, Michelet, Tocqueville, Mill) too easy to follow? Do you prefer a pretentious, self-important, and overly ornate literary style that calls attention to its own artfulness to one that is simple and direct? Do you like pretentious authors who assume that you're more interested in seeing them display their verbal wit than in learning anything about the subject they're purportedly writing about? Well then, Thomas Carlyle's history of the French Revolution may be the book for you!

I am, of course, being somewhat tongue-in-cheek here... Thomas Carlyle was one of Victorian Britain's great writers. He's an important historical figure and his prose style is unique, distinctive, and is in many ways, quite beautiful and poetic. Yet, the fact remains that those who are not already familiar with Carlyle should be wary-- very, very wary-- of picking this book up.

There are several reasons for this. First, the fact of the matter is that Carlyle's 'history' is not history as we might think of itThere is little/nothing in the way of exposition or explanation in the sense of laying out 'what happened' or 'who was involved'. Rather, this book is written from the premise that the readers are already familiar with all the facts and details of the Revolution and are more interested in reading an artful, witty, and clever 'retelling' of it. Individuals and events are alluded to vaguely, metaphorically, with the expectation that the reader knows all of this already like the back of his/her hand. When you read something like, "With Rumor unleashed, She flies from De Berry! That Scarlet Woman!", you're expected to already know who's being talked about and to know pretty much everything there is to know what it is that's being alluded to... Carlyle, you see, doesn't explain, or introduce, or contextualize... and you don't read Carlyle for explanation or introduction or contextualization. Rather, you're supposed to already be informed-- and then to read him for the sheer pleasure of his witty wordplay and to nod appreciatively at it. But if you're not already familiar with the persons and events of the Revolution-- you'll quickly find yourself unable to understand anything and will just be lost.

Nor can one consider Carlyle's _The French Revolution_ to be a scholarly study. The man *was* extremely learned of course-- he knew his stuff. But he's not really advancing an argument or thesis about the Revolution or why it happened... the sorts of things academic scholars dispute. He does wax abstractly on occasion, but not to make general claims about the Revolution (or even history in general), but rather to make vague interjections on obscure metaphysical matters (largely derived from German idealist philosophy... and again, these are unexplained... you're expected to already be familiar with thus stuff).

Finally, there the matter of Carlyle's style. As noted above, it's highly poetic and possesses a kind of ornate (if pretentious) beauty that can be appreciated in small doses. Yet, the fact remains that his peculiar mannerisms (including unnecessary capitalization, archaic and pompous turns of phrase, incomplete sentences followed by exclamation points, the constant use of the present tense even though he's writing about the past, apostrophic asides, etc.) become extremely annoying to read after more than a few pages. At best, it's an acquired taste... and personally, I'm not sure that there are many folks around today who will find the effort spent in acquiring the taste to be worthwhile.

In sum.... don't get this book hoping to learn anything about the French Revolution. Only get this book if you want to read Carlyle for the sake of reading Carlyle. Put otherwise, don't get this if you want to read a work of history about the French Revolution-- you'll be wholly disappointed. The only reason to get it, in fact, is for its value as an example of Carlyle's unique and self-indulgent literary style.

Thomas Carlyle's unique poetic style of prose may be tough to take early on, but after a few pages, it does grow on you. It's all overly dramatic and sensational, but what subject could be more so than the French Revolution itself? Carlyle paints a grim description of the complete and utter chaos of the times, particulary the Great Terror of mid-1794. He does, however, remain somewhat non-judgemental regarding the Revolution's key figures, and lets the readers sort out for themselves who the real culprits are. He may over-simplify the obvious at certain junctures in the book, but his style is riveting and as this shocking and dismal tale of woe continues, the reader is further drawn into a daze and trance similar to the Terror's unfortunate victims.
Some have suggested that it's better to read a "normal" history of the French Revolution before one undertakes this famous volume. I disagree. This is as good a place to start as any concerning that most volatile of times. Simply put, Carlyle's "French Revolution" is both informative and exciting, and it has held up well since it was first published in 1837.

The authors of the previous review were too harsh on the text - it isn't a mere display of literary muscle turned lightly to the French Revolution, it's an interesting take on the subject from a penetrating mind.

The other reviews saying "Don't read this if you don't know everything about the revolution" seem a little bit silly to me having read it - if you know nothing about French history and the revolution, ok, you might have some difficulties. But if you have even a rough view of the revolution (from a textbook chapter, short article, almost anything) you won't be lost. Once or twice one might be forced to read back or do a tiny bit of side-reading to get a colourful 19th century reference, but it isn't nearly as oblique as the first reviewer made out.

The style is not difficult to read, considering the date, and the narration is often captivating or amusing. The individual, literary portraiture of historical figures is unique and valuable to me in building a kind of familiarity with events, however cautiously. And the claim that it isn't "historically" written by modern standards - perhaps the reviewer was too busy composing clever jabs to note the date of writing? If you want Francois Furet, read Francois Furet, but Thomas Carlyle unfortunately didn't have the benefit of 20th century developments in historical methods.

I agree with other reviewers stating that it is an enjoyable and easy read. Having recently completed high school science i was dissapointed at the lack of depth the book showed. Even the case studies are a brief summary of facts and opinion. I'm not saying the book is bad, just that it's ideal if you don't know much (or anything) about forensic science.

Despite the basic information i still enjoyed it.

This is a picture book for adults about forensics. The photos and illustrations are amazing, varied, and, often, gruesome and graphic. The text seems like an afterthought; nothing more than the basic information is given, and each case study covers the facts and very little else. This book is not for someone like myself who studies forensics, but rather for someone who is hooked on CSI, doesn't know anything about the topic, and wants to read more about it. This book is a much better general forensics overview and has more detailed information [and more information generally] the The Forensic Science of C.S.I.

Hidden Evidence also explains the major types of forensic science [ballistics, DNA, trace evidence, etc] and uses case studies to document each field. Overall, this book is a good starting point for anyone interested in forensic science.

Forensic science began with the 17th century invention of the microscope, became even wider spread as a police crime solving tool with the 18th century invention of photography, was expanded in the 19th and 20th centuries to include everything from fingerprinting to DNA sampling. Hidden Evidence: Forty True Crimes And How Forensic Science Helped Solve Them showcases the history of this unique crime solving resource from 1775 and Paul Revere's use of the dentures he made to identify the body of Dr. Joseph Warren after the doctor had been fatally wounded at Bunker Hill, to 1923 when forensic scientist Edward Heinrich tracked down train robbers who had murdered an entire train crew in cold blood through a set of overalls. David Owen surveys the characteristics of all types of deaths from drowning and hanging to strangling and suffocating, the collection and use of various kinds of physical evident, numerous weapons, and more. Hidden Evidence is informative, engaging, highly recommended reading for anyone with an interest in the role forensic science has made for itself in crime detection and law enforcement from its inception to the present day.

This book, by the editors of the Washington Post, does a good job of describing the events which led to the deadlocked 2000 Presidential election. In addition to detailing the paths which led to the deadlock, the book discusses all the post-election issues in a very readable format. Surprisingly, the books editors seem only slightly tilted towards Gore (especially considering it is the Washington Post, which is noted for its liberal bias), so no matter who you voted for, there is much to be found here for anyone with an interest in contemporary politics.

Two things struck me while reading this book, the first is that I doubt there is a book out there that is truly balanced and not somewhat biased. The second thing was that Gore really got the shaft, not so much by the recount wars, but by the election official that came up with the Butterfly Ballot. In the history of the USA this decision ranks up there with new Coke and the XFL, what a mistake. As far as the reporting in the book it was not bad for a review of all the articles they had in the paper, but it did not really dig into the particular issues very deeply. I wanted more detail and behind the scenes with both the candidates. I also wanted more details on the court cases; I felt like the sky-high overview of the issues of the cases did not do such an important issue justice.

In reading the book I think a little bit of a democratic bias comes out, just a little, but enough to notice. I also thought it interesting that they had far more details of the Gore group then the Bush camp, it follows the perception that the Post is somewhat liberal in its views. The book is an overview that came out almost 10 minutes after Gore hung up the phone on the second concession call so there are a few more details out now that they did not get in the book. Overall it is a good effort and a readable book, but not the end all be all on the subject.

This book recounts the nation's closest election with fascinating detail. The authors' genuine style of storyweaving lends the impression that the fly on the wall must have had a Washington Post tape-recorder implanted in it's wing. Deadlock was not at all like re-reading the same old newspaper articles again; this book casts a fresh look at the dramatic strategy game that took place in Florida. I enjoyed it as a self-professed political junkie and my husband found it equally readable as a historical account of remarkable events.

Frankly, I was disappointed by "The Rackets". Thomas Kelly is an engaging writer with a fairly unique view of New York City and its social components, with an easy-to-read style and a healthy sense of social commentary. Unfortunately, he has major difficulty in resolving his plotlines; Kelly's means of wrapping things up is to start eliminating major characters, and not peacefully, either. This "last man standing" approach to writing was also evident in his previous work "Payback", another engrossing novel that falls apart towards the end.

Kelly is clearly an ambitious novelist, and we could sorely use a great urban novel for our time. "The Rackets" is not that book. One hopes that Kelly continues to grow as a writer because he certainly possesses an interesting voice. He seems to know and understand the world of which he writes, and his characters are engaging and believable. If only he could figure out where to take them in his stories.

Tom Kelly's characters are so real I expected them to jump off the pages of The Rackets and stick a gun to my head - or at least ask for my vote. I picked up the book after a long trip at ten o'clock one recent morning. I didn't put it down until I was finished reading it twelve hours later. And I didn't want it to end - the ultimate sign of a great story.

This book kicked ... . I was really impressed with the way the writer developed the characters and constructed the scenes. Some people write books. Tom Kelly, on the other hand, is a genuine writer. I already loaned it to a friend.

I just returned from a month in India, traveling with both the Lonely Planet (9th ed.) and Rough Guide (3rd ed.) If you are considering a long trip across the breadth of India, I would strongly suggest taking BOTH books. The Lonely Planet is great for practical details (train times, phone numbers, etc.) but spends too much space reviewing individual restaurants and hotels. Even though the book tops out over 1000 pages, the sections devoted to actually explaining the sights and the wonderful culture and history of India are very short.

In contrast, the Rough Guide spends much more space discussing the background and culture of individual locations, and is packed with lots of interesting details not found in the Lonely Planet. The RG spends less space on restaurant/hotel reviews, which was perfectly fine - I'd rather know more about the places I'm visiting than worry how much chicken shahjani costs at some particular restaurant.

The tone and approach of the books are different too - the RG takes a much more optimistic, romantic view of India, while the LP is often so terse and cynical that it doesn't really inspire you to visit many wonderful places.

Get the LP for the listings. Get the RG to appreciate the beauty of India.

This is the second time to visit India.Both time I took the same Lonely Planet. Always I choose hotel from it and felt not bad. In some small city, hight rank hotel means good servie and the price was not so high as you image it. First all the price listed in the book is as same as in the hotel, so try to cut off nearly 30% off is the very important thing to do during the trip.
Also I visited Jaisalmer on May, but if you following the book you will never go there in such cray summer. In fact, the summer was high enough, but still interesting. No more tourist means you can enjoy alone, and only myself in the hotel you can get nearly 50% discountdown for low season. If you read you can find a lot of things from the book, but on the trip everything is changed, you never image the book can guide you everything. Try to ask person around you, and get the most reasonable price.
I will plan to go to india again, by the guide of Lonely Planet, but I think I need a new version.

I used the 98 edition while travelling in Sept/Oct 99 and found it extremely informative even though the prices were outdated. Prices may change overnight but 1,000 year-old temple ruins probably won't. It did seem as though every other traveler (and hotel owner and rickshaw driver...) owned a copy, yet it provided an excellent orientation to the places I visited and served as a great reference tool for further exploration.

The maps were better than anything I found locally and the cultural info was very helpful.

The book is bulky/heavy but tearing out key sections can easily solve this. I cut my book in half this way and got lots of envious stares from others lugging their entire LP or Rough Guide around and actually referring to maybe a third of it.

Get this book, get the LP Hindi-Urdu phrase book, but skip the LP travel atlas unless you want to walk across India.

This book would fall into the same category as many movies I have seen. It COULD had been a great book if they just would have developed it more and gave more detail into the parts people want to read. For on thing, the author spends 2 pages, max, describing what is suppose to be an erotic "kiss of death" from the vampire yet spends half a chapter describing some theater in the book. Let's be real people! I bought this book to be scared, intrigued, and turned on. Not to get tips on home decor'.

I read most of these other reviews before I read BOUND IN BLOOD. I'm glad I did. It was because of the weak reviews that I picked it up.

The book's a shocker.

For many year's we've been treated to humanized vampires who have retained their human emotions and with them cluttering displays of pathos and bathos. David Thomas Lord did none of that. His vampire, Jean-Luc, is the second most evil monster I've ever come across. His mother, Noel, comes in first!

This novel comes closer to true art than any horror novel ever has, and it's his first book! Horror literature! Who'd have thought it! If it is to become a series (as was hinted at), I can't wait.

In a time when horror has become either splatter-punk, gangsta nonsense or simply horrified romance novels, BOUND IN BLOOD soars above the pack. Lord's characters, notably Jack, Noel, Claude and Laura, are timeless. Their commentaries on the mortal world around them are bitingly true and murderously satiric.

Lord's prose is absolutely top-notch. No contemporary horror writer can touch him. The book is a marvel of information. Lessons on art, music, theater and fashion only add dimension to the underlying story of betrayal and revenge between lovers and between mother and son.

It is a violent book. Violence in the most cruel and most surprising ways. It is full of sex too. Some readers may not be up for the amount of sex and violence in this book. But it's not gratuitous. Jack lures his victims with his sexuality. Or, perhaps, with theirs. As for the violence? Well, it's a horror story involving a creature who drinks the blood of mortals. He's not Mary Poppins, or for that matter, Lestat.

I've been a lifelong fan of horror stories and horror writers. David Thomas Lord has more than justified my addiction. I only wish that there were more stars to give this guy.

David Thomas Lord does a sensational job on his debut novel. Sexy and violent, it's the best vampire book I've read in many, many years. The central character, the vampire Jack, is a cold-hearted monster, a handsome sex-machine and also glib and witty. Unlike the current vogue of humanizing vampires, Lord unleashes a true monster on the mean streets of New York City, one without pity and remorse. It's great to see that somebody remembered what vampires were supposed to be about! While tearing down some of the overused elements of the traditional vampire legend, Lord creates lots of new lore and new ways of looking at vampires. Alternately sexy, funny and horrifying, you'll want to keep the lights on for this one. I've heard that it's the first in a series. Can't wait for his new one! If you like your horror hot and chilling, you'll want to read this one too.

Of course there's nothing new or amazing here as flash5 is "old" by this era's definition and this book was made in August 2001, but that doesn't mean having a book on this topic isn't useful in and of itself.

The problem with this type of book is that it skims the "core essentials" of gamemaking, and provides completed games for you to teach yourself... I could go to a dozen sites and teach myself games.

What I need is a book that holds your hand through building the essential widgets in game making. multiple hit tests, function completion, forking the same function with multiple instances, etc. Not something that says "see? here's a game that does all this stuff now look through it."

This book will only be frustrating to someone who loves the friends of ed series. . . but it acts as a great tool to sell the other books for sure, as I learned more about game making in Flash 5 Actionscript Studio & Flash 5 Dynamic Content studio than in this book.

Bottomline: this should have been entitled Flash Games Exhibition

There's a fair amount of good content, with a couple of chapters on 3d by Glen Rhodes, who is a good author and inspiring scripter.

Incredible book. The authors have brought the game classic game development environment on the flash platform.
Os probably the most complex book on flash games, but it' a must to have on your developer shelf!