Robert J. Kennedy's walk to Alaska is one of the most exciting adventures of all time. His humor, honesty, humility and courage will touch the reader deeply. The book's style is uniquely cryptic, but enjoyable once you get used to it.

No matter what goes wrong, Kennedy maintains an upbeat attitude at all times. His conversations with his buddy Ty, who came to visit Kennedy three times during the walk, are truly delightful and insightful. Several times in the book I was moved to tears. And many more times I found myself laughing out loud.

Kennedy strikingly lacks the crudeness often found in other adventurers. His ineptness is also unique among adventurers, but that only endears him further.

I strongly recommend this book for readers of all ages. Kennedy's story proclaims loudly that chivalry still lives; and it also has a sense of humor.

That so many things could go wrong during a 5-month walk is almost incredible. But the book documents the events with great detail. The reader often feels he or she is right there walking alongside. Or crawling alongside, in some cases.

The bear encounter is truly gripping, due mainly to its remote and dark setting.

Buy this book, but don't expect it to be anything like any other adventure book you have ever read. This is a spiritual journey as well as a physical and romantic one.

I cannot recommend any book more highly.

As a writer/storyteller, I was captivated by this review of Ong's life-long endeavor to bring back the vocal word to the culture. Farrel's inclusion of other familiar proponents of the evolution of human consciousness (Buber, Chardin, Cargas) and noted contemporaries such as John Bradshaw, gave this lay person a feeling of comfort among scholarly dialogue. Ong's acceptance of modern technology, such as TV, gives credence to his "ordinary language philosophy." The focus of Farrell's study, is the "feeling/valuing function" of our human consciousness, and also the focus of many psychologists today. Not a quick read, yet a page turner nevertheless.

If you've ever thought history was even slightly boring, try thinking of the myriad alternative human universes that could have been born -- indeed, that had to be avoided -- along the way to where we are. If the Armada had not been defeated ... if Lee had won the civil war ... the possibilites are endless, and if you don't experience little shudders of horror or nostalgic loss when listening to this collection, you haven't been listening hard enough.

Too many of the texts out there on spiritual warfare take off on tangents and gain much of their "wisdom" from sources other than from the Bible (some even admit to getting their information straight from demons!). The biblical path is not demons behind every bush and it is not that demons do not exist. But inbetween these two extremes lies the biblical path set down by Dean and Ice.

Please read this book before you go to Anderson or Hammond or any others on this matter. The information in this book is MUCH more biblical!

Voila, the compacted dithers of mutton & larks! Ecco, predicted lathers of metro & lux! Lo, the monastic matters of mirrors & lakes! Zounds, the hermetic spiels of motor & locks! Behold, the gathered deepistles of monachus & littera! Witness the mighty phrasings of miracle lustrum! All hail the bibliotickles, viva the dublintenders, long live the fortunetells of hoy & halloo! Heed the prophetic warblings of minus & linus! Lament the bombastic tangles of mittwoch & letznacht! Observe the respected nightingales, doves & coulombians. Celebrate the valiantimes scattered by freundlich & freud! Three cheers for the bandied ampersands of max & louie, the mingled missives of joyful eremites.

Moseley and Nicholls have collaborated on a wonderfully beautiful floral book. The depth, detail and color in each pop up, 5 total, are gorgeous. A definite must have for the the garden lover and romantic.

Most concordances let you trace an English word through the Bible. But, is it really the same word? Is ``infirmity'' astheneo (weakness) or nesos (sickness) in this verse? Both Youngs and Strongs give you the Hebrew or Greek word. However, Youngs gives you all the translations of the ``original'' word, so that you can trace just that word. One English word may actually be several different Hebrew or Greek words. Likewise, one Hebrew or Greek word may actually be translated by several English words. Straighten it all out with Youngs, without having to become a language scholar.

The tales of King Arthur and of the knights of the Round Table are well-known and have been the subject of many books, poems (Tennyson), at least two musical works (Purcell's "King Arthur", and the famous Broadway musical, "Camelot"), and films ("Camelot", based on the musical, and "Excalibur"). The most famous English-language book version of these tales is this version by Sir Thomas Malory, yet this is not easily readable, even in modern prose. The modern English rendition by Keith Baines is excellent, for it allows those of us who do not have Ph.D's in English literature to get an idea of what the original was like, but the book itself is tedious in its very nature.

What you should expect with this book is a very good beginning and ending, and a "will it ever end ?" middle. Arthur himself cannot be called the central character, for he is virtually absent, except in the first tale of the book, which deals with his coming to power, and the last one, about his death. The rest of this book is concerned with jousting and tournaments, so much that in the end one gets bored with this never-ending succession of fights with knights whose names you'll only read once and which have no consequence on what is supposed to be the larger plot (such as the quest for the Holy Grail, or the famous Tristram and Iseult tale). Of course, the better-known knights of the Round Table, such as Launcelot, Tristram, and Percivale, are present, but only from time to time, and narration often shifts from one to the other for no reason.

What this book lacks most is continuity. Apart from the first and last tales, everything in between is not in chronological order, which gets confusing. In one tale one character is dead and another is well-known; in the next tale the first character is living and the second one is unknown (just take the example of King Pellinore and Sir Percivale). All tales were obviously separate ones, and the reader, at some point, will simply stop trying to understand how Malory ever came up with such an order for his tales. If Malory (or his original publishers) had any idea in mind when they chose this setup of the tales, it will appear unclear to most readers.

One of the few good points of this book is that, since it was written in the late Middle Ages, it avoids to a certain extent the over-romanticization of the Middle Ages, which is what later authors, such as Sir Walter Scott, did to such an extent that even today we cannot think of the Middle Ages without having in mind the picture-perfect version of it (which I will not delve into -- I'm sure you know what I have in mind). Even though chivalry as described in the book has some romantic elements attached to it, it is never fully exploited, and "Le Morte d'Arthur" certainly does not fit the requirements to be classified into the romantic genre (which was not fully described until the nineteenth century). This book therefore does not use romanticism as we now know it. But this good point may also be one of the book's weaknesses, because the topic is a legend, and not fact. Because this subject is not historically accurate (and some parts of the book are hilariously improbable), Malory could not use realism to replace romanticism, and I believe that if he had used more romanticism in his book it would only have made it better. In the end, Malory used neither style, and this makes his writing style very dry. His characters are mere fighting machines with no emotional depth, his narration is action, action, and action: no description, either of his own characters or of the scenery (a castle is a castle, nothing more). The scenes he depicts cannot be located, for the setting is never described. Malory, above all, was an awful storyteller. He could only describe his characters jousting and fighting, and since this had nothing to do with the larger plot, this only lengthens the book for no reason. (If you want a modern comparison, just think of a public orator who just tells personal anecdotes that are not related to his topic.)

Furthermore, anyone interested in the Middle Ages has nothing to gain from reading this book. It holds no historical interest (apart from a study of the English language, but then I would not go for this modern rendition) for the reason that its subject is not based on fact and its description of society in the early Middle Ages is simplistic. This book is certainly no "Canterbury Tales", in which a lot can be learned about what was life during the Middle Ages. So if you are mainly interested in history I'd skip "Le Morte d'Arthur" and I'd go for "The Canterbury Tales" instead.

In conclusion, "Le Morte d'Arthur" is worth reading only if you have the patience to go through it, for this book is overlong and repetitive. Keith Baines's rendition makes this task easier, and his appendix on the main characters is very helpful if you intend to skip parts (which you should not do because the whole is chronologically inaccurate).

Quite possibly the finest piece of
prose available to the modern world
(or at least the finest I have come
across). Absolutely no library
(neither home nor public) would be
complete, or dare I say, worth a
damn, without an unabridged copy of
Malory's insightful retelling of
many of the greatest Arthurian
romances (hundreds of years old at
the time Malory set them to paper in
the fifteenth century) all woven
together to form an eloquent vision
of chivalry, romance, and adventure
the likes of which all great epics,
before or since, pale in comparison.
No wonder this book has survived
five hundred years and longer. It's
all here: the most powerful
characters to ever grace the pages
of literary fiction, Arthur,
Guinevere, Mordred, Launcelot,
Merlin, Tristram, etc.; timeless
tales of honor, knights-errant (in
shining armor no less), fobidden
love, fair maidens, et al. Told
here in its most gimmering light are
the search for the Sangreal (Holy
Grail), the love triangle of Arthur,
Guinevere, and Launcelot, the
betrayal of Mordred, the wisdom of
Merlin, the restoration and eventual
demise of christian Britain, and the
tragic love of Tristram and Isould.
We all know these stories. We all
know of the sword Excalibur. We all
know of glorious Camelot. So what
makes these tales stand above all
else? We all long for what we
cannot have. Is there a man alive
who isn't seeking a true lover as
Guinevere? Is there an ignorant
fool among us who doesn't desire
peace or true love or fulfillment of
the soul? The Holy Grail, as we say?
Or Paradise? Isn't that what Dante
was searching for? And Milton? And
wouldn't it have been easier for
Odysses to, just give up? Today,
yes. Oh if only we could learn to
believe in a greater existence as
our ancestors did. What a better
people we would be. Not that
A! rthur's Britain was without its
problems. Quite the opposite,
actually. The difference between
Arthur's Camelot and our world:
Arthur's knights, Bors, Percivale,
and Galahad in particular, searched
for a remedy. No obstacle was too
difficult, no challenge too great,
as to prevent these valorous knights
from achieving their quest of
finding their prize, the existential
Holy Grail. Today, we search for
the best program on television, or
the fastest way to make french
fries. At that, only if it's
convenient. We could all learn from
Malory's tales (and I realize this
is simply my opinion). Le Morte D'
Arthur should be in every household
to share, and to enjoy, and to learn
from. It is a sensational book
(sectioned into either eight or
twenty one books, depending upon the
source) for all members of the
family. It should be read, and
reread often. Here I must voice my
strong opinion that this a book not
meant to be read in modern English.
Keith Baines' modern interpretation
of Malory's book is a wonderful
companion volume to the middle
English prose, but should not be
used as a substitute. Any reader
who chooses so is missing out on a
fantastic experience. It is not
that difficult to comprehend. To
read a modern rendition, instead of
one in Malory's elegant language, is
like reading the Bible in modern
English. Sure, the point is clear,
but a piece of the art has been
tainted. I also recommend picking
up a volume of Aubrey Beardsley's
art, which compliments Le Morte
D'Arthur very nicely. Also, I want
to mention that Malory's Le Morte
D'Arthur is the best amd most
complete of all Arthurian
collections, although there a large
number of great stories that should
not be ignored, some of which
include, Alfred Lord Tennyson's
Idylls of the King, T.H. White's
Once and Future King, and some
me! dieval works which predate
Malory's masterpiece, including,
Geoffrey of Monmouth's The History of the Kings of Britain, and four poems (authors unknown), Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, La Mort le Roi
Artu, Morte Arthure, and Le Morte
Arthur. Even Mark Twain (arguably
one of the greatest, if not the
greatest, of all English writers)
could not resist creating a story
using Malory's fascinating
characters as the centerpiece, albeit in a comical, yet enchanting, way. I welcome all comments and am anxious to speak with others who agree with my strong words and with those who choose to call me fool, I am happy to debate my opinion. Thank you for taking the time to share my world.

Highbridge Classics' "Le Morte d'Arthur,"as read by legendary British thespian Derek Jacobi, is a great adaptation of Thomas Malory's quintessential Arthurian tome. Newcomers to Malory will find the audio book more accessible than the beautiful but often enigmatic source volume, while long-time Malory devotees will discover fresh nuances in Jacobi's authoritative rendition. Necessarily, some significant abridgements have been made, but at six audiocassettes this production still captures much of the Arthurian world's enormous scope. Featured storylines include Arthur's rise to the throne and his claiming of Excalibur, the epic search for the Holy Grail, the doomed love between Lancelot and Guenever, and the tragic final battle between Arthur and his ill-begotten son, Mordred. Jacobi conveys all the glory of Malory's prose style, while nonetheless cleaning up the diction a bit for modern ears. Finally, Ruth Morse's concise text introduction provides some keen observations on the big picture of the Arthurian myth. A magnificent version of Malory that no lover of Camelot should be without.

Evan Thomas has written an excellent, fair-minded, admirably even-handed biography of Robert Kennedy, and, given the mythos that surrounds the Kennedys, that alone is a significant accomplishment. Thomas also happens to be a fine writer, and this book is a pleasure to read (with the exception that at times I found it very hard to tell which "Kennedy" Thomas was talking about). However -- and I'm not saying that this is Thomas' fault - after nearly 400 pages, I still can't say I understand the "younger brother full of pain." For instance, I still have essentially no clue - assuming that RFK had not been assassinated, had won the Democratic nomination for President in 1968 (unlikely), and defeated Richard Nixon in the general election (also unlikely) - what kind of President he would have made. And, probably wisely, Thomas takes the safe, responsible road and does not speculate on this but simply ends the book with RFK's assassination. Too bad. I would have enjoyed Thomas' speculations very much, and this is an unfortunate flaw in an otherwise first-rate book.

As portrayed by Thomas, RFK is, to paraphrase Churchill, a mystery, an enigma, and a riddle. What made this guy tick? Thomas speculates, which is about all he can do given the subject and the availability of solid information, but really, who knows? Was RFK a liberal, moderate, conservative, all of the above, or something else altogether? Again, after reading Thomas' book, I still can't say. Which was the "real RFK" - the young assistant to Senator Joseph McCarthy's communist witchhunts or the older man who came to admire Che Guevara and Cesar Chavez? The young man who -- as Attorney General -- went along with J. Edgar Hoover's wiretaps of Martin Luther King and had little interest in the civil rights struggle, or the older man who made a triumphant, inspirational tour of black South Africa (and the inner cities of the USA)? A realpolitik, ruthless, back-channel conniver? Or an idealistic, insecure, brave, inspirational leader? And on and on the contradictions, complexities, and confusions go, as Thomas tries valiantly to make sense of it all.

In sum, this is an excellent book that I highly recommend, about a fascinating, important person who, ultimately, may simply be unknowable. So, I find it highly appropriate that one of RFK's favorite books was Camus' "The Stranger," because that is what RFK was, and possibly always will be.

Evan Thomas has set an exceptionally high standard for political as well as historical biography with this masterful account of the life of a brilliant and tortured leader. Highly readable and meticulously researched with the added advantage of having unlimited exclusive access to Kennedy's private papers, this narrative brings to life a complex and dynamically forceful man.

From RFK's early days to his untimely death while reaching for the Presidency, Thomas gives us an unvarnished but at the same time a sympathetic look at the "ruthless" Kennedy. We see RFK molding his skills as the tireless/relentless campaign manager for his brother as JFK ran for Congress in '46 and the Senate in '52. His driven pursuit of Hoffa as a part of the Senate Rackets Committee brings RFK into the national spotlight and sets the stage for the monolithic JFK Presidential campaign and administration.

Awarded the Attorney Generalship for his work during the campaign, Bobby offsets the nepotism charges by becoming the most trusted advisor to his brother during one of history's most sublime and at the same time most dangerous Presidential terms. Thomas deftly covers the inside machinations of such historical events as the Bay of Pigs, the multiple assasination plots against Castro and the subsequent Missile Crisis. RFK's role is at once expertly and judiciously displayed as the manipulative bully who runs interference while JFK remains above the fray. Conversely, when challenged, he shows that he can become thoughtful and brilliant on the world stage as evidenced by his performance during the Missile Crisis.

Of lesser known historical events such as the burgeoning civil rights acts of the early 60's, the fight against the "mob" and organized crime and the constant and frustrating battles with J. Edgar Hoover, Thomas reveals RFK in the same light...the same intensity, the same propensity for error (notable in the tapping of Martin Luther King's phone)and the same caring leadership with his characteristically kindred feelings for the "underdog".

Following JFK's assasination, we see RFK's mythological transformation from follower to leader...Thomas covers his Senate election following that crippling "depression" period and shows how he slowly established his own policies and agenda. All this leads to the almost Shakespearian tragedy of the '68 campaign for the Presidency and a brilliant ending to the book where Thomas philosophizes on what a prospective RFK Presidential administration might have been: "He probably would have been devious in some ways, and it is not impossible to imagine him abusing the power of his office. But he would have surely tried to tackle the problems of poverty and discrimination, and he would have tried to end the killing in Vietnam long before President Nixon did."

A sweeping narrative of a fascinating man and a shrewd examination of his character, this work by Evan Thomas is both comprehensive and an entertaining read and should stand the test of time and be considered the best RFK biography of the many that are currently published. This is an essential read for any political or historical buff and I recommend it highly.

I have read many, many biographies of Robert F. Kennedy and feel that this one should become the definitive biography of the man.

The book is written in a very easy to read manner. The author goes out of his way to be fair to his subject. He refuses to be lazy, he actually does research into Kennedy's life. Other biographers just seem to repeat the stories they have heard over the years without actually looking into them themselves, further clouding the truth. Thomas was given access to many of Robert Kennedy's private papers while writing the book.

This book does not view Robert Kennedy as a saint. However, it also does not view him as a devil. What comes across to me is that Kennedy was basically a decent man. There are many stories that have been repeated over the years about his private life, none offer any proof. For example, Evan Thomas could find no evidence of a sexual affair between Robert Kennedy and Marilyn Monroe.

Regardless of Kennedy's private life, which I believe should remain his own, he did great things. He courageously stood up for causes that probably would have cost him the presidential election had he lived to election day. He highlighted the plight of the farm workers in California, the poverty of children in rural communities, the lack of opportunities for native Americans. He was the right person for the times. He is said to be the last white politician ever loved by black Americans.

This book does a good job in explaining many of the things Kennedy did in his career. The section on the Cuban Missile Crisis is one of the better parts of the book. Robert Kennedy's role during this time is very well described. Thomas shows many examples of initiatives Kennedy took that didn't work very well, and he doesn't mind saying why they didn't work.

If you are looking for gossip you will not find it in this book. However, if you are interested in history and the motivations of those who made history I would highly recommend you read Robert Kennedy: His Life.

Nora Roberts has never dissapointed me...I've read almost most of her books and she always manages to captivate me. This book is one of my favorites..Montana Sky is a truly great book.

The "Women of Mercy" are wonderful characters. Tess with her bold, independent, devil-may-care attitude would have you envying her for her strength and attitude. Willa with her capable strength and her iron will..the way she shoulder every day problems is remarkable. Lily with her quiet strength which helped her survive every gust of bad luck that faith delt her.

Ahh..and ofcourse their men..Ben with his balant sexuality could make your toes curl and Neathedral ways is perfect for Willa's stubborn ways.

Nate with his smooth..charming cowboy ways is perfect for Tess' restlesness.

Adam with his calming, tenderness, and patience is perfect for Lily's battered soul.

The mystery is great..it just keeps you guessing..I do adore mystery but my heart belongs to romance...and mix is a great thing!

This book is one of my favorite Nora Roberts novels. It is also one of my favorite contemporary romance books. Montana Sky has everything: love, laughter, fear, romance, greed, passion... it doesn't disappoint in any respect.

Montana Sky is the story of the three Mercy sisters: Willa (the main character of the story) who was raised on Mercy ranch with her jerk of a father, Tess, the oldest who was raised in california and thinks Montana is as out of nowhere as any place, and Tess, the middle sister, who was in an abusive relationship and is on the run.

Montana Sky focuses on the three sisters and the men in their lives: Ben, Nate, and Adam. Each man is definitely dream man material, and are very strong characters. The woman are also strong, and are not willing to be ruled by their men.

The book tells about the year the sisters are forced to live on the Mercy ranch, in order to inherit, as stipulated by Jack Mercy, their father. Nora Roberts definitely did her research on ranch life, because as far as I could tell, it was all very accurate. She brings to life the hardships that occur being a rancher, especially a woman rancher, and she also manages to showcase the beauty that is Montana.

This is a wonderful novel that celebrates life. Though death is involved, and in a very grotesque way, it is a novel of finding family, and finding love. I was very surprised by the ending, as I had had no idea who was the killer. I have reread this book many times and enjoyed it more and more each time. The three sisters differences make an enjoyable cast of characters that any romance reader will love.

I just read "Montana Sky" last week on vacation - and a good thing, too! I never would have been able to get up for work since I couldn't put the book down until 2 every morning! This was the first Nora Roberts suspense novel in which I have not been able to guess who the killer was until he was actually revealed. I enjoyed it so much I started reading it again to my husband - who's really a Stephen King fan, not into "romance novels" - on the drive home. He liked it so much he has to finish the half we didn't get to on his own! The developing relationship between the three sisters, while you KNEW they would bond, was still a lot of fun to see happening. Willa and Tess were both great characters, and while I found Lily a little too meek for my liking, the strength that she developed redeemed her at the end. Also, Ben was the classic NR hero - tough, gentle, romantic, a bully - you know, the kind you can't help falling in love with. Just be warned - if you're looking for a classic "romance novel", you may have the same complaints some others have about the violence in this book. It does get a little graphic.