It is possible to create a trust (living or otherwise) that does not do what you expect it to do. If you want to direct how the trustees handle the trust's assets after you are gone, and how much income specific beneficiaries will obtain from the trust, or create a complex trust, this may be the book you want.

If all you want is a living trust that will allow your assets to escape probate, and maximize the estate tax deductions, then forget this book. Read "the Living Trust" by Abts instead

I picked up this book knowing very little about trusts. Its a US book, and I needed to find out about UK tax. So there needs to be a UK edition. Nevertheless it proved very useful in raising potential red flags. It also has white space at the back where I made copious notes and reminders for my family and financial advisor. The book raises lots of questions to ask family members.

It appears that the Winston-Salem attorney (below) may have jumped the gun. Although he has not read the book, I'm not sure why he feels it's his duty to attack the author's credentials. I think the book is professionally written and is a helpful guide for readers who want to think and plan out the needs of their family and communicate those needs to their attorney. Proper planning is a key part of any family trust.

The allegation that the authors lack the proper credentials on the subject matter seems to be without merit. While a "Lexis-Nexis" search is the best way to obtain legal citations, it is not an exhaustive search of business articles, financial filings and can miss information from supplemental "special report" sections of paid journals. Perhaps the reviewer was too busy to refer to his own subscriptions of The Wall Street Journal or Kiplinger's Retirement Report.

Mr. Croke (the author) was cited in both of those journals earlier this year. The April, 2000 issue of Kiplinger's Retirement Report talks positively about his work and his book in a page and a half article and he is quoted several times in the March 7th, 2000 edition of The Wall Street Journal under an article called "Tangled Trusts".

Geriatric hardcore. It's unlike the rest Wharton's books which I liked very much. I wish I had missed it.

He's one of my favorite authors and several of his books make my all time top ten list...but this one, never. The voice is Wharton, but the progressive love affair was unappetizing to the point of nausea. Also, the climax may have been written as a hoax, it was that unbelieveably trite. The setting was described so beautifully I could see it, as could the blind heroine, through the painter's eyes. The concept of mutual other self actualization was intriguing. Its enactment was not. Perhaps I expected too much.

I took this lengthy audiobook on a long road trip through North Dakota with my girlfriend. When we got to our destination, we drove around and around the blocks listening to the book instead of going in. While I don't consider this the best book I've ever listened to, it has a way of engaging the mind that is provocative. There is a lot of sensitivity in the material and the reading of it. I'm 50 years old, so maybe this held more meaning for me. The mark of a good read is that it sticks in the back of the mind. This one definitely does so. I recommend this audiobook very highly.

I loved the flavor of this book; hard to find authors who seem authentic about this period of time; just post WWII. Reminded me of another French travel book Clementine in the Kitchen; which was about a less sad time in this wonderful country.

The main characters aren't extremely interesting, but one wants to get to know the author better; it is as if a friend is telling you the story of these "babes in the woods" Americans. I think I liked Harold and Barbara Rhodes best on their first trip in spite of themselves. They were too sophisticated the second time to be sympathetic characters.

Good read, don't look for much action.

On review, I think this is an evocative and highly skilful rendering of La Belle France three years after the Second World War. Novels like this show something which is quite ineffable in any other form. Nothing much happens for all the life is in the minutiae of the everyday and the France that is captured here and which of course exists no longer is seen through the uncomprehending eyes of the young American couple who insensitively travel about a France where people are still suffering the physical deprivations of the War, still talking incessantly of Nazi soldiers. Despite being Francophiles in theory at least, this inseparable couple, are quite out of their cultural (and linguistic) depth in the French society they encounter, notably at the Chateau and afterwards in Paris. They are rather painful in their efforts not to be overcharged because they are Americans and preoccupied with their own comforts. They are quite put out that the chatelaine of the chateau has not provided them with a double bed as requested and when they request water for bathing it is tepid by the time they get to it. They cannot guess at the heroic efforts of their hostess to keep the chateau at all. The wonder is that they are taken under the wing of some of the guests of the Chateau. Much is made of one guest, Eugene's subsequent froideur towards them. There is no great mystery. His is a personality that blows hot and cold but this exercises the American pair a great deal. Their coupleness is also irritating but here I am expressing a personal prejudice. Published in the early sixties, The Chateau is an interesting read for anyone who has ever travelled to France. I just wouldn't wish Harold and his wife on anyone and certainly not the French.

The Chateau is a wonderful "travelogue" for people who love well written novels. The story begins with the interesting premise of vacationing in France just after the war. The novel shows the tensions of the "haves" and "have nots" between financially war torn France and the booming post war U.S. The Chateau serves to remind us of the graciousness of everyday life and the small luxuries afforded by simply being American. All of the American insecurities of traveling abroad crop up throughout the novel: (e.g. the gaucheness of being an American, the lack of a long history or the U.S's place in Western Culture). No one character is entirely lovable or wretched. That is precisely what makes it such a thought provoking novel. It is perfect for those who travel or have been to France on an extended trip. Enjoy the book and recommend it to a friend. The story can stand on its own but the writing remains the feast.

After a trip to France and Germany with my best friend from college, our husbands being so nice as to let us go traveling without them, I am now even more determined to go back. With this book in hand and perhaps a few videos on the Alps, you will be planning one of the most memorable vacations you can imagine.

I definitely want to visit the mountains in the Alps in France, Switzerland, and Austria. I have a renewed interest after watching "The Sound of Music." This majestic mountain range has divided Europe into a multitude of different cultures, traditions, languages and climates.

You will want to visit Salzburg, walk in pristine meadows, spend the day in a mountain village or take a boat ride in a lake. I am now dreaming of which cozy hotel I want to stay in. The cuisine is said to be hearty, the air crisp and you will want to take a cable car ride up to the top of the mountains to view the panorama.

What impresses me most about this area is the castles. Yes, even Disneyland has a castle which was inspired by Europe's famous castle in the Alps. It is incredible. If you take a trip to one castle in your life, visit this one! Visit the fanciful Neuschwantein Castle! The interior is rich, painted...just the most beautiful and elaborate decorating you could imagine.

If you do buy this book and decide to take a trip, save up for all the beautiful wood carvings, music boxes, clocks, etc. What will impress you most is the flowers, they are everywhere. The pace of life is slower, and the buildings have artwork covering them.

The region of Leavenworth, WA reminds me most of the Alps. So, if you want to take a short trip to see if you would like the Alps, try Leavenworth and I think you will be packing your bags for a longer trip. It is just breathtaking there.

If you can't get overseas then take lots of "treadmill trips." I love the one called "Journey through The Alps, Roads to Oberammergau," but I can't find it at Amazon. It is set to the music of Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, Handel and other great European composers. You also get to visit Zurich, Luzern, Munich, Zermatt and other Alpine cities and towns. I truly hope you can watch at least one video. With the book and videos, you will be packing those bags. Just take a warm coat and walking shoes!

This compilation of the best hiking trails in the Alps will give readers plenty of ideas for planning an unforgettable vacation filled with scenic beauty. All aspects of the trip are covered including accommodations, what to bring along, equipment and locale information. A vast list of tourist resources is also included. Although targeted towards Americans, this book is handy for any nationality.

The reason I deducted a star is due to the fact that some is the information is outdated. Nevertheless, I highly recommend this book to anyone seeking to enjoy the wondrous beauty of the Alps.

George Rutler is one of the shining stars of the Catholic right. He's had his own show on Mother Angelica's network, his videos are for sale in conservative Catholic bookstores, and he's written a few books that are highly touted among conservative Catholics. I haven't read all of them, only his book on St. John Vianney, the patron saint of parish priests. Frankly, I wasn't impressed with it. This book is a bad imitation of Chesterton, written exclusively for an audience of like minded persons as the author. His smug self-rightousness didn't leave me wanting to run out and buy his "complete works." You can almost hear him patting himself on the back after what he regards as a particularly clever statement. It's not a bad book if you agree with absolutely everything the author says. In fact, his world would be a pretty nice one to live in. The real world, however, the one most people live in from day to day, doesn't bear much of a resemblance to this guy's depiction of it.

It's an inspiring story, and Rutler writes a wonderful look at his life. It's a good read, but is very intellectual and philosophical - not your typical book about all the great God does thru the Saint but rather those great things in the context of life in St. John Vianney's time. Not for a lazy reader - it's too full of deep ideas.

We used Lonely Planets for holiday travel in southern France for the first (and possible last) time. The recommended restaurant of Peter Mayle fame, Gu et Fils, on Frederick Mistral in Aix was either a typo or non-existent as we located the street but no restaurant to be found. Restaurant Le Merou Bleu of Marsailles was a mediocre tourist trap with despicable service. The impersonal nature of the LP recommendations for hotels merely define the facilities, but do not say enough about the character or level of cleanliness. We checked in (and out of) one of Lonely Planet's recommended two star hotels in Avignon and for about five euros more per night, found a potential three star hotel that was much better siutated, cleaner, bigger and quieter.

Boy was this book a disappointment. Other LP guides weren't this bad. It seems this book only tries to get you to those places every other tourist is at, and only by public transportation. It skips out-of-the-way places that locals know and love, chooses hotels in noisy central sections of larger towns only. Worse, my 2002 edition still didn't give costs in Euro! Thanks to friends living in various areas of France, I was able to visit wonderful places that aren't even mentioned in the book. Restaurants were poorly chosen, and almost always tourist traps. If you rented a car (which is a really smart way as a group) you won't find any info in this book about getting around, or doing such duh! activities as wine-tasting routes, swimming holes, you-pick farms, sound-and-light shows. LP, if you're reading this: ever heard of the Puy-du-Fou? Everyone in Europe seems to have been there!

I expect to use a book like this to help me plan a trip. It should be organized by region so I can decide among things that are close by. And I need the kind of information that goes beyond just listing the sites: is it crowded, charming, dangerous, special?

This book tries to answer these questions with a personal tone. As I read it I start to get a sense of the writers personalities and tastes, so that I can gauge my agreement with their opinions.

I wish the hotel and restaurant reviews shaded towards the high end a bit more. But I haven't found a series (I also have their guides to Europe and Mexico) that I can trust as well as this one.

Most of these photos are in many other books. Essentially nothing new. Topped off by some serious errors- casualties on the left flank of Omaha labeled as being at Pt Du Hoe, Utah pics claimed to be Omaha, mention of "cliffs" at Utah beach, and shots from the Southern France landing added in without mention of their correct origin. A waste of time and money.

These extraordinary photos were selected, we are told, from 60 plain gray boxes each containing approximately 100 photos located in the National Archives II. As noted by another reviewer here, the captions leave much to be desired. We are told a DUKW is an amphibious tracked vehicle, which is a landing craft designated as an LVT. In fact, no LVTs were at Normandy, much to the chagrin of Major General Charles Corlett. The three companies of the 2nd Rangers who took Pointe du Hoc (D, E and F) are identified as "two divisions". Equally bizarre is the photo of British soldiers going ashore on "Utah Beach". As excellent as the photos are, greater care should have been exercised in their labeling. But do not let that stop you from obtaining a copy. The book contains 128 pages of great photographs, a number of which are familiar, including those taken by Robert Capa. But many, most in fact, were new to this reviewer. Perhaps if Keeney and Butler had presented more photos and few words, this book would still be in print.

This book gives you a image tour through what is one of the most amazing and interesting battles of World War II. To graphically see what it was like transports you back to the beaches on that day. The commentary along with the photography give a chlling account of D-Day.

The textbook contains a great deal of relevant basic information on politics in Western Europe. Unfortunately, it needs to be better organized. This goes for the organization of chapters and organization within the chapters. I used it in my Western European Politics class, but students did not respond favorably. The textbook sometimes picks up a topic without any obvious reason for doing so, and then, having said a few sentences about it, leaves it off, also without any obvious reason. This makes individual chapters hard to follow.

For those who teach European politics, their students, and those who wish to gain a basic understanding of the topic, this text is quite nicely done. Each country section - including the EU - is about 80-100 pages long. While good for those who are new to the topic, it doesn't bore those who aren't. It's one of the better textbooks I've found on the subject, and I will use it in my class.

My only complaint about this play is that Shakespeare should have had some dialogues where the characters discussed crucial history before the play opens. Gloucester (murdered or dead before the play but mentioned several times) had tried to usurp Richard's crown too many times. History itself is not sure if Gloucester died or was murdered. Bolingbroke for a while conspired with Gloucester and now sees another oppurtunity to usurp the crown.The virtuous John of Gaunt served Richard with honor and integrity and eventually moved parliament into arresting Gloucester for treason. This would of made John of Gaunt's rages all the more valid. Otherwise this play is outstanding! Richard shows himself to be capable of ruling at times, but gains our contempt when he seizes his the honorable John of Gaunt's wealth. John of Gaunt's final rage in 2.1 is a passage of immense rageful beauty. Also, Shakespeare moves us into strongly suspecting that Richard had Gloucester murdered. However, despite Richard's crime, Shakespeare masterfully reverses our feelings and moves us into having deep pity for Richard when he is deposed. The Bishop of Carlisle (Richard's true friend) provides some powerful passages of his own. I can not overestimate the grace in which Shakespeare increases our new won pity for Richard when Bolingbroke (Gaunt's rightful heir) regains his wealth and the death of Gloucester is left ambiguous. 5.1, when Richard sadly leaves his queen and can see that Henry IV and his followers will eventually divide is a scene of sorrowful beauty. 5.4 is chilling when Exton plots Richard's murder. 5.5 is chilling and captivating when Richard dies but manages to take two of the thugs down with him. The icing on the cake is that Bolingbroke (Henry IV) can only regret his actions and realize that he has gotten himself into a troublesome situation. But that will be covered in "1 Henry IV" and "2 Henry IV." We can easily argue that it is in "Richard II" where we see Shakespeare's mastery of the language at its finest.

Richard II was incompetent, wastefully extravagant, overtaxed his nobles and peasants, ignored his senior advisors, and lavished dukedoms on his favorites. His rival, Henry of Bolingbroke (later Henry IV), was popular with the common man and undeservingly suffered banishment and loss of all his property. And yet two centuries later Elizabethans viewed the overthrow of Richard II as fundamentally wrong and ultimately responsible for 100 years of crisis and civil war. Queen Elizabeth's government even censored Shakespeare's play.

Shakespeare masterfully manipulates our feelings and attitude toward Richard II and Bolingbroke. We initially watch Richard II try to reconcile differences between two apparently loyal subjects each challenging the other's loyalty to the king. He seemingly reluctantly approves a trial by combat. But a month later, only minutes before combat begins, he banishes both form England. We begin to question Richard's motivation.

Richard's subsequent behavior, especially his illegal seizure of Bolingbroke's land and title, persuades us that his overthrow is justified. But as King Richard's position declines, a more kingly, more contemplative ruler emerges. He faces overthrow and eventual death with dignity and courage. Meanwhile we see Bolingbroke, now Henry IV, beset with unease, uncertainty, and eventually guilt for his action.

Shakespeare also leaves us in in a state of uncertainty. What is the role of a subject? What are the limits of passive obedience? How do we reconcile the overthrow of an incompetent ruler with the divine right of kings? Will Henry IV, his children, or England itself suffer retribution?

Richard II has elements of a tragedy, but is fundamentally a historical play. I was late coming to Shakespeare's English histories and despite my familiarity with many of his works I found myself somewhat disoriented. I did not appreciate the complex relationships between the aristocratic families, nor what had happened before. Fortunately I was rescued by Peter Saccio, the author of "Shakespeare's English Kings". Saccio's delightful book explores how Shakespeare's imagination and actual history are intertwined.

I hope you enjoy Richard II as much as I have. It is the gateway to Henry IV (Parts 1 and 2) and Henry V, all exceptional plays.

The thing with Shakespeare histories is that almost no one reads them, as opposed to his tragedies and comedies. I don't know why that is. The histories that are read are either Henry V (largely due to Branagh's movie), Richard III (because the hunchback king is so over-the-top evil), or the gargantuan trilogy of Henry VI, with the nearly saintly king (at least by Part III) who much prefers contemplating religion and ethics to ruling and dealing with the cabals among his nobles.

So why read a relatively obscure history about a relatively obscure king? Aside from the obvious (it's Shakespeare, stupid), it is a wonderful piece of writing - intense, lyrical, and subtle. Richard II is morally ambiguous, initially an arrogant, callous figure who heeds no warnings against his behavior. Of course, his behavior, which includes seizing the property of nobles without regard for their heirs, leads to his downfall. Nothing in his character or behavior inspires his subjects so he has no passionate defenders when one of the wronged heirs leads a rebellion to depose Richard II. But Richard now becomes a much more sympathetic figure -especially in the scene where he confronts the usurper, Richard acknowledges his mistakes, but eloquently wonders what happens when the wronged subjects can depose the leader when they are wronged. What then of the monarchy, what then of England?

On top of the profound political musings, you get some extraordinarily lyrical Shakespeare (and that is truly extraordinary). Most well known may be the description of England that was used in the airline commercial a few years back... "This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle, ..."

If you like Shakespeare and haven't read this play, you've missed a gem.

I had such great hopes for this book and really looked forward to reading it. I could barely make it half the way through when I finally gave up. The prose is turgid with faulty syntax. I often had to reread sentences to make sure I understood what the author was trying to say. I was given the impression that he wrote with authority but found some of his statements and facts to be questionable. The 1930s in Paris deserve a better expose than this.

The main characters are here: Stavisky, Daladier, Reynaud in politics, Sartre (very briefly), Picasso, Dali in the arts, Chanel, Coty, etc. Several rather minor artists, such as the photographer Brassaï, are also presented in an interesting, anecdotal fashion. So much space is devoted to James Joyce, Henry Miller and others, however, that it should really be titled "Expatriates in 1930s Paris." Numerous American preconceptions about the French are repeated. The book is also seriously compromised by the many mistakes in French ("C'est moi qui EST l'artiste," "pas DES histoires" -- The words "et" and "est" are not, as Wiser implies, pronounced the same) and by factual mistakes (The French Academy does not edit the Larousse Dictionary; The obelisk in the Place de la Concorde is incorrectly identified as 'Cleopatra's Needle'; Chaplin's the Great Dictator was not made in the early 1930s, etc.). There is such sloppy chronology, one wonders how much of the other details the author has simply invented, or embroidered.

This book gives a brief review of life in Paris before World War 2. It covers James Joyce, Reynaud, Bricktop, Joesphine Baker and other. It should have covered more about foreign policy, and incidents such as the assassination of the Nazi diplomat in Paris and Munich. These incidents contributed to World War 2 and The Fall of France to the Germans in 1940.