His goal for Texans to take "renewed personal responsibility" for their lives was one he took on for himself. Although a lot of the material here can be found in other sources, this is is a very current biography, ending just before Bush's defeat of Senator McCain in the 2000 Republican presidential primary. Wukovits traces W's life from childhood until then using quotes from family, friends, fellow business people, and government officials. Not a white-washed account, the negatives as well as the positives of his life are treated fairly objectively. Black and white photos, notes, index, and a list of works for further reading are included.

Left shift provides a fascinating year by year analysis of how artists in the UK responded to left politics, women's liberation and the gay movement in the 70s. Many artists at this time were seeking to re-establish a social purpose.

Some of the work produced was truly innovative. The work of Brisley and the lifestyle adopted by the mavericks Gilbert and George crossed into performance. Brisley produced a disturbing effect:

"At Gallery House, Brisley converted a large room into a kind of filthy prison cell by splashing walls and windows with black and grey paint and covering the floor wity debris, dirt and slop water. He occupied the room for two weeks while living on a restricted diet and with no amusements or external communications."

"Clearly, the performance was a metaphor for the existentialist predicament of man, an isolated, nameless individual reduced to a National Insurance number and imprisoned in squalor, with no history and a future limited to survival. (p.72)

The boundaries of art were being stretched in other ways too. Artists were seeking to take art to new audiences with community art, art working within industry and agitprop art linked to social movements. As the author points out community art:

"reflected a strong desire on the part of many artists to escape from the isolation of the studio, the existing gallery system and its middle-class audience, in order to reach out to new audiences who either had no experience of the fine arts or were hostile to them." p.132

The motivation was clear. John Stezaker is quoted in regard to avant-garde artists but in fact his observations apply much more widely:

"The avant-garde artist has simply become a business man, wheeling and dealing in a restricted cultural circle and to a specialist clientele". p.76

The problem of absorbtion or incorporation runs as an understated theme throughout this history. Most art seems dependant on the indulgences of Capitalists (Alistair McAlpine and the Saatchis being obvious examples. Most of what is left is funded from public money dispensed by groups like the Arts Council.

The arrival of video "challenged the monopoly of existing broadcasting institutions and, by enabling children and laypeople to use video equipment, the medium and technology of television were demystified. Thus, the passive consumption of television was replaced or supplemented by the active production of images." p.151

Or didn't as it turned out. Even where grants or the grace and favour of wealthy patrons played no part the corrupting pull of the market made itself felt:

"As in the case of so much photomontage art of the 1970s, radical film and video often had a love/hate relationship with mainstream media because they were the dominant forms of communication and because they provided - if access could be obtained without compromising artistic integrity - the opportunity to reach a much wider, non-art world audience." p.152

How far "artistic integrity" had been compromised during the 70s is not really seriously examined. There are, however, few examples of outright censorship documented - one of the few being the closure of the Art Theory course in 1973 at Coventry. This might indicate a suprising liberality or it might show that the process of funding art or its relationship with the market were themselves enough to ensure that any questioning of the status quo was within clearly understood boundaries.

There are a few areas where I feel radical art broke out of the box. Jamie Reid: "the man who more than any other created the cut-and-paste graphic-guerilla style associated with the punk era, particularly in his record sleeves for the Sex Pistols" according to Esquire (June 2002) did communicate to new audiences. His work is briefly considered in Left Shift but others working in the same field are not on the basis that that David Laing and Jon Savage have already done so.

We all come from somewhere

What I find interesting is that Left Shift places Reid in a context. He came from somewhere (as all we opponents of capitalism do):

"Reid,s activities during the first half of the 1970s can be considered part of the community arts movement that was then gathering momentum having started in the 1960s. The Surburban Press was only one of many such small, alternative printing presses, phoyography and poster workshops. Community art, of course, was defined and limited by its local character. However, in Reid's case, the advent of punk enabled his experience of community publishing, printing, politics and agit-prop graphics to find a new lease of life in one of capitalism's most powerful cultural industries - the music business - consequently, his ideas, images and slogans were to reach a huge, transatlantic audience." pp. 42-43

I was disappointed that Left Shift did not analyse mass art more. I remember the late 70s as a time of people wearing badges, and political posters, graffiti and stickers of both Left and Right (in the form of the National Front) being highly visible. I recall attempts to subvert commercial adverts (by both feminists and racists) by blanking words out to change meaning or adding words with spray-paint. There was an excitement, a confrontation and a buzz going on. Left Shift is interesting and well documented but it doesn't get the feeling of the period over to me.

Ultimately in order to judge whether any real challenge had been made by the Left in the 70s we should consider what happened next. As the author points out "the shift to the Left in the British art world during the 1970s was not sustained during the following two decades." p.253 Politically, there was in fact a lurch to the Right with the election of Thatcher in 1979. The reasons for this are briefly examined but the knowledge of outcome should have led the author to re-examine far more the long-term significance (or lack of it) of Left art in the 70s.

All three authors have been through spiritual journeys of appreciating the charismatic movement. In this book they present their reflections on the movement. A good and balanced book.

In my opinion, Tom Smail's 1st chapter on "The Cross and the Spirit: Toward a Theology of Renewal" is one of the best articles/messages I've read/listened to as it relates to the pros and cons of charismatic theology. It's worth the price of the book!

Other topics touched on include signs and wonders, demonology, worship, prophecy.

Overall a good book for those interested in the charismatic movement

In a style similar to that of Asian ink paintings Moti elegantly captures the beauty of nature in his artwork. Moti's wonderful paintings, prints, etchings & drawings will draw you into the peaceful & simple world he creates.

In Moti's world ships glide across the ocean while the sun gently slips into the sea and flowers rest delicately in a vase. Trees stand silently against the blue gray sky or bend their branches to the blowing winds.

Horses prance and tigers prowl ready to pounce their prey. Owls sit softly on branches or extend their wings & slip into the night. Siamese cats stand stoically & fish swim by. A child sits quietly for a portrait.

The text is in both in English & French. It includes biographical information & extensive quotes from Moti himself. The introduction compares Moti's work with Turner's. There are also several photographs of Moti working.

For someone who has been searching for a thorough guide book on the restaurant management like me, this book is a gem! It's packed with invaluable advice, practical tips and thorough guidelines on virtually all essential aspects of the restaurant business. It is well organized and written in such a clear, simple language. In short, an extraordinary guide in many ways!

As the saying goes the glory is not in never falling but in rising every time you fall. In John Lords Book song of the phoenix he talks of the real purpose of failure and uses real life examples of people who have failed at one or several things in their life but have used the opportunties given by these failures to explore new territory with their selves and their lives. Lord also goes into the westeren attitudes of failure and how it can be destructive or counter productive to growth.He diminishes the myth of failure as being a terrible thing by explaining how often times failure can just be an experiment and opportunity for growth. He even tells of a class at a school where students are encouraged to fail called failure 101. With this fresh new view on failure people can be encouraged to take chances and not let a failure get them down , they can forge ahead and try again with something else. Like Helen Keller once said " Life is either a daring adventure or nothing" Keller also said that security does not exist in nature and the fearful get caught as often as the bold. This book is so enlightening and sheds light on a sore and misunderstood experience in life failure but it is not such a terrible thing. Sometimes it is just lifes' way of redirecting you to something better. With Lords book you will be inspired to try new and different things after you fail at one thing. This book is out of print now but I highly recommend that anyone who has struggled with failures to attain it at a used book shop or see if you can find a friend who has this book. You wont regret it.

This book is worth reading, especially if you have or know someone who is getting older. Like many of Walker's books, her descriptions are so vivid you are right there with her characters on a moutain in Vermont.

After consuming everything Hillerman has written, and learning something new about Native American culture from each book, and after Hillerman's squib on the Dust jacket, my expectations were set so far above what this trite book delivered that even two stars seems kind... As a 1/8 Arapaho [& 1/8 Blackfoot] i had hoped to learn something about their life. The characterizations were also paper thin, including both the male and female protagonists... and the denouement was telegraphed for miles... ergo, even as a mystery/suspense novel, this one flunked.

Ghost Walker is the story of Father O'Malley a Jesuit priest who works at St. Francis on the Arapaho reservation, and in his free time solves crime. Father O'Malley is a likeable character, with two problems: he has just discovered a body in a ditch by the side of the road, and two: he has financial trouble and is having difficulty making ends meet.

I wanted to like Ghost Walker, because it contained some of my favorite fictional elements: Native American Characters and Mystery, but the writing was inconsistent, and I really couldn't decide whether this book was supposed to be a 'cozy' mystery or hard-edged murder mystery, as a result it was neither, and the story suffered as a result.

Pros: Unique characters, interesting setting, some Native American Lore described.

Cons: O'Malley interfered WAY too much in Police Investigations. Police AND FBI, seemed to sit by the phone, waiting for O'Malley to call. (Yeah, right.) Substance and Alcohol Abuse themes felt a little bit heavy-handed for this reader, and I felt a bit sermonized to. The ending left me saying: Where's the mystery?

Overall, this was an okay read. I would have liked it better if it had been either a hard-edged mystery or a cozy. As both, it was rather weak, and it left me with a blah, ambivalent feeling.

This series by Ms. Coel is refreshing because the main characters are not perfect people. They are just like us with doubts and failures and struggles to deal with while solving crimes too. Excellent story telling and the Native American/southwestern flavor is a plus.

"Halliwell's Film & Video Guide" has always been my favorite guide to films since the first edition came out many years ago. The first thing I noticed about Halliwell was that he used the entire 4-star scale in a consistent way. Most other film guides, while they purport to rate movies on a scale of 0 to 4 stars, really just use 2.5 to 4 (with ratings of 0 to 2 all meaning "not recommended" -- but who cares whether a film is rated 1 versus 1.5, if it's not recommended, don't bother). Halliwell's system takes some getting used to, but once you see the value in it (if you give it enough time), the pay-off is worthwhile. And another refreshing aspect is that relatively few films get the highest rating of 4-stars, unlike some critics who give 4-stars to half the films they see, making the rating meaningless.

After Halliwell died, John Walker took over. He almost immediately 'updated' many of Halliwell's ratings (e.g., "Persona," which used to rank a 2-star rating, was upgraded to 4-stars). I agree with most of Walkers updates, though he has a slight tendency to over-rate, in my opinion.

Many film entries are peppered with quotes from other critics, often going against Halliwell's and Walker's assessment and offering an alternate evaluation -- this shows that these gentleman have an open mind.

This is a thoroughly enjoyable, incredibly well-researched book. Worth every penny. But stay with it -- it's a goldmine if you take the time to delve in.

This is truly one of the finest and most invaluable film guides available on the market today; it is also one of the first of its kind, but the years have been very nice to this perennial favorite which hasn't lost a bit of its spark. The synopsis given for each film is generally brief, but always concise! Of course, you may find yourself in conflict with the reviewer's overall opinion of the film, but let's face it, that's gonna happen sooner or later with any movie guide you buy! Admittedley, Halliwell's book is one of the most aggressively opinionated film guides out there(one can turn pages and pages without spotting a film that rates four, even three stars), but the quips, even the most disparaging of them, are undeniably clever and amusing. Halliwell's Film Guide is also unique in that it often includes a movie's slogan above the title of the film. Yes, Leonard Maltin is one of the country's most knowledgable and rightfully respected film critics of today, but Leslie Halliwell was the great man who pretty much set the standard for the many other movie and video guides out there, including Leonard's. Although Halliwell's guide is pricier than most of the other movie reference books, the payoff is immeasurable, as the book provides page after page and hour after hour of endless reading pleasure. Whether you are looking to be informed or entertained or perhaps both, Halliwell's Film Guide is the book for you! Those who like it will also appreciate Halliwell's Who's Who in the Movies.

"Halliwell's Film & Video Guide" has always been my favorite guide to films since the first edition came out many years ago. The first thing I noticed about Halliwell was that he used the entire 4-star scale in a consistent way. Most other film guides, while they purport to rate movies on a scale of 0 to 4 stars, really just use 2.5 to 4. It takes some getting used to, but once you see the value in his system (if you give it enough time), the pay-off is worthwhile.

After Halliwell died, John Walker took over. He almost immediately 'updated' many of Halliwell's ratings (e.g., "Persona," which used to rank a 2-star rating, was upgraded to 4-stars). I agree with most of Walkers updates, though he has a slight tendency to over-rate.

This is a thoroughly enjoyable, incredibly well-researched book. Worth every penny. But stay with it -- it's a goldmine if you take the time to delve in. Judging by some of the other reviews I've read here, many people gave up (perhaps too soon).

On the positive side, this is perhaps the most comprehensive of film guides available. Not only do Halliwell and Walker cover most films released on the western market, but they also give more production details than any other similar volume. As a reference work, it is definitely worth having at hand.

The reviews themselves are interesting, though each is limited to one or two sentences, and the opportunity for comment is too often squandered away on petty sarcasms that miss the mark. There are a few inconsistencies apparent. Some films are awarded two or three stars (out of a maximum of 4) with little rationale offered. For example, A Room with a View is alotted 3 stars before being (apparently) dismissed by a description of it as a lacklustre drama that might have been made for TV, but which might be enjoyed by those starved of entertainment. The lamentable 'Independence Day' is given one star, whilst the comparable, yet far superior, Armageddon is awarded none. One of the great British pictures of the 1960s, Billy Liar, is given a well-deserved three stars (so far so good), which then threatens to become almost meaningless when the grossly inferior (though still worthy) British comedy of the same decade, Carry On Up the Khyber, is given the same. Why these inconsistencies? Perhaps the last of those can be explained by the fact that Halliwell himself didn't even think that the Carry On films were decent enough to warrant individual entries, whereas Walker later reneged on his behalf and not only gave them their own reviews, but awarded many of them one or two stars (quite insane, on the whole, given some of the excellent films not even considered worthy of a single star).

The verdict: useful reference book; always interesting to read other people's opinions, but many of the opinions expressed in here are severely off the mark; lastly, I suspect most of the flaws can be attributed to John Walker's editing following Halliwell's death.

This lowers a 5-star recommendation given in an earlier review based on a previous edition of this guide. The latest edition leaves intact Mr. Halliwell's reviews for films before 1965 and these remain invaluable. But Mr. Walker's tampering with later reviews is now extensive and has added only pretentiousness and poor judgment to the product. The work remains exceptional for Golden Age movies; otherwise, caveat emptor.

The previous reviewer from England pretty much hit the nail on the head regarding what has happened to this film guide over the
years. I think it's only reasonable to assume that once Halliwell died someone new, with a different set of criteria would be writing synopsis and reviews for movies. This in itself is not a problem. What is inexcusable is the way the editor who took over (John Walker) went back and changed the ratings on most of the films in the book in order to keep it more aligned with what he sees as the current popular view. So a movie like Blue Velvet which got zero stars in the original now has two stars or Battle of Algiers which had one star now has four stars. Compounding the confusion is the fact that the original synopsis written by Halliwell have NOT been changed. Therefore you can read pans of movies by Halliwell (such as BV) and then see it highly recommended with Walkers star ratings. Hmm.

One thing that wasn't mentioned was the typeface. The older
editions used to be printed on very crisp white paper with dark easily readable typeface. Now it is printed on cheaper paper with microscopic typeface that anyone without very good vision is recommended to purchase a magnifying glass for. While I find it tolerable for looking up a few films it certainly dissuades one from just kicking back and browsing through it for any length of time.

Lastly, all the way through the 1997 edition Halliwell's Guide was always available in a sturdy hardcover edition as well as a paperback. Now paperback is the only option one gets.

This guide gets three stars because it's still a useful book but
it is truly discouraging the way that it has been ruthlessly altered by the new editor to the point that it is a mere shadow of its former self.