This book fills a gap in the literature out there for people with AIDS/HIV and the law. This ACLU handbook will prove invaluable to people living with HIV and their lawyers. If anything, this book accomplishes the task of showing people how to take advantage of protective laws, particularly antidiscrimination laws in the workplace. this handbook makes it clear how to take advantage of protective laws.

This volume is very welcome to those who are interested in the 19th century American stage and especially those who are interested in the almost-forgotten actor Lawrence Barrett. Barrett was one of the first American actor-managers who oversaw all details of his productions and this book illustrates his creative control over the plays he performed. Two of Howells' plays were performed by Barrett to great acclaim and Barrett made sure that everything went according to plan. You could call his letters, dashed off in a spare moment, as harping and irritating, but he was a perfectionist which undoubtedly made Howells' plays all the stronger upon the stage. Barrett was never one to refrain from criticism! The letters are arranged chronologically so that the course of their relationship unfolds naturally. A final letter, separated by the last one by several years, is a touching note of sympathy for Barrett's widow. Despite their artistic differences, these two men truly respected each other. A wonderful book.

This book is brilliant! This book is broken down into the major points of contract law. Each subject is broken down into the elements. It explains everything from formation of contracts, breach, performance, mistake, estoppel, parol evidence, statute of frauds and so forth. It is easy to read and has all annotations to caselaw and the UCC in easy to read footnotes at the bottom of the page. In additon, William Henning (one of the authors) is on the drafting committe for Article 2. This book is worth it for the section on the parol evidence rule alone! It helped me ace my first year contract exams.

William Mayne writes in a spare and poetic style, which may take some getting used to, but which I believe truly reflects the workings of a child's mind. The story here is of of two young English girls who find a strange boy near their village. The village witch informs them that the boy will only stay a year and a day. At the end of that time, the boy is gone, but he will stay in the heart of the family forever.

This is a beautifully designed small volume, nicely illustrated, from a wonderful series of books.

JB Priestly wrote a book about time ('Man and Time') and in it he referred to a WH Hudson novel called 'A Crystal Age'. His couple of paragraphs about 'A Crystal Age' stimulated my interest but nowhere could I find the novel he referred to. However, I did find 'Green Mansions' and I have read it several times. It is a beautiful novel with an undertone of darkness (is death the darkness that we all live with during the beauty of life?). Perhaps 'Green Mansions' disappointed me a little after triggering my romantic nerve. I did, however, keep exploring the writings of WH Hudson - 'Long Ago and Far Away', 'The Purple Land', 'Idle Days in Patagonia' and the wonderful 'A Shepherd's Life'.

On a recent trip to the States I visited a small specialist bookshop where it was suggested I might be able to get access to 'A Crystal Age' through abebooks.com. This was great advice. I have just finished reading 'A Crystal Age' and I concur with JB Priestley's assessment. 'A Crystal Age' is worth the effort of pursuing - it is a surprising first-person utopian novel in which Hudson's love of nature does not render him oblivious to the fact that there are downsides in all worlds - all imaginable worlds. Just like the dark shadows in 'Green Mansions'. The end of 'A Crystal Age' is so surprising - I believe very few readers would see what is coming - I certainly didn't as I rushed on towards it. There is a certain illogic to the ending, but there is also something that haunts me continuously. I hope the illogic has not been a contributing factor in this novel's failure to be reprinted. But why else has it not been picked up - I am sure there is a market.

'A Crystal Age' is a stronger less romantic novel than 'Green Mansions', but it is also exceptional for many reasons. I don't hesitate in recommending 'Green Mansions' but I also urge readers to pursue 'A Crystal Age' - it is only a matter of time before I will be re-reading it myself. As for publishers who are looking for books from the past to reprint - give 'A Crystal Age' a look.

I read the Classic Comic version of this book many times when I was a kid. I've only now just read the original and found it's haunting beauty lingered in my mind for the last 2 weeks. The description of Abels mental travails at the end of the book is a particularly memorable and inspired.

My mother having read this book sometime before I was born in the 50's, was so moved that she named me after Rima. When I was 12 I read it for the first time, and after moving many times the book was lost. I have always wanted to re-read it as an adult feeling that there was quite a bit more I would appreciate now. I am delighted to have located this novel, and will be thrilled not to have to explain to my friends once more where my name originated. I will just loan them the book!

This is the 4th book in the Matt Scudder series and is a very appropriately titled book, with Scudder investigating a stabbing murder that happened 9 years ago. He doesn't particularly look forward to the case but, with nothing better to do, he begins to sift through old ground in between cups of bourbon-laced coffee.

The Matt Scudder character is the important feature of this book as we follow his tortured journey around New York City chasing up clues in a long-dead case. He unearths clues and leads as a good detective should, but it's his battle with the bottle that proves the most fascinating story. He finally gets a good hard smack across the chops in this book which may help put him on the road to sobriety, at least, it scares him enough to consider he may need help.

This is another fine example of an outstanding modern hardboiled mystery, just part of an outstanding hardboiled series.

This is probably the best Matt Scudder book I've read yet. It takes us to a time when Scudder drank but never thought about his habit as something that was gradually controlling his life. He picks up a very interesting case, a particularly greusome murder that slipped through the cracks 9 years earlier and is only now receiving a true investigation. When the beautiful young girl turns out to be anything but an innocent victim, her father (Scudder's client) fires him and refuses to go on cooperating with the investigation. It's too late for Matt, though. He's onto something here, and he knows it. Scudder won't rest until he's solved the case, or at least finished himself off with a case of bourbon.

Lawrence Block took his Scudder books to a new level in "Stab in the Dark". The first three books were good enough to keep me reading, but they were not anything special. In the other books the only thing that kept me interested was Block's style and Scudder's character. The mysteries were never that interesting. This book however has a wonderful plot and has a wonderful supporting cast. Everything about this book surpassed the previous entries. While Scudder, himself, has always been a good character this entry allows the reader to probe inside his mind a little more. Hopefully this was Block's stepping stone and the rest of the series is on par with this one. It is a must read for any P.I. lover.

Shirer's solid narration on the troubled history of the French Third Republic (1870-1940) explains how decades of monarchism, anti-semitism, and bitter divisions weakened France and contributed to the 1940 collapse. When Shirer covers the 1940 debacle in the later chapters, it seems almost pre-destined. I liked the author's strong attention to the 1930's, when weak French governments failed to confront a re-arming Nazi Germany. William L. Shirer (1904-93) was a U.S. journalist in Europe from 1925-40 who later spent years researching the rather baffling subject of the decline of France. This volume doesn't quite match his "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," but Shirer's immense talents are evident, and Charles De Gaulle complimented his objectivity.

In the opinion of this reader, Shirer has coupled his splendid evocative power of language with a subject worthy of it; the fall of France in 1940 remains one of the greatest defeats ever suffered by the champions of liberty. If you wish you understand the Third Republic with all the depth of complexity that Shirer intended, reading the whole of this admittedly corpulent history will be well worth the effort. However, with a familiarity with the history of France, reading the prologue and the last 50 pages or so will transport you to Paris in spring of 1940, as the government split and the Petain decided that this time, unlike Verdun, "they shall... pass." While typing my tenth-grade history report at 4 in the morning, last May, I can still remember being moved to the depths of my soul by Shirer's eloquent and tragically beautiful portrayal of the fall of Liberty. If you love France, the war between freedom and oppression, or simply the erudite potency of Shirer's writing, "The Collapse of the Third Republic" is utterly indispensable.

Although not as famous as Shirer's "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", this book is just as important. The book gives a survey of the history of the French Third Republic from its founding in the aftermath of the humiliating defeat at the hands of Prussia in 1870, through its crisis in the Dreyfus Affair, victory in World War I and finally to the debacle of 1940. The author has the unique background of being both an accomplished journalist as well as a serious historian which gives the book a very readable style. What particularly appealed to me is his moral passion. He is no "objective, neutral observer". He is a Francophile who is willing to expose the terrible weaknesses that brought down the country he loves so much. The fact that he, as a newspaper correspondent, personally witnessed the horrors of Nazi Germany before the war gives a fervor to his writing that is refreshing in this day and age of viewing history as merely a comparison of the various "narratives" of the different sides in a conflict.
Shirer begins by pointing out the important fact that at the constituent assembly that wrote the constitution for the Third Republic, the majority of the delegates were, in fact, monarchists, but they could not decide if the king should be from the House of Bourbon or Orleans, so a republican form of government was chosen as a compromise. Thus, the new regime started out on the wrong foot as something no one really wanted. Throughout its 70 years history there were always strong anti-republican movements that threatened the very existence of the regime, chronic political instability and resistance to necessary reforms (for example, women were given the vote only after World War 2). In the military realm, the exhaustion resulting from the terrible losses in World War 1 combined with a reluctance to change the strategies that worked then and obliviousness to major technological changes in armored and aerial warfare led to the ossification of the army high command and the development of the "Maginot mentality".
In spite of all the disadvantages, when the German invasion began in 1940, the French stood a good chance of halting the invader. It has been repeatedly demostrated in modern warfare that the defense is very strong and that the attacker usually needs to have a clear superiority in order to prevail. Shirer demolishes the myths propagated by French Commander Weygand and others that the Germans had overwhelming superiority. In numbers of men and tanks the two sides were pretty evenly matched and the French tanks were of superior quality. The French officer corps was also much more experienced than that of the Germans because of the restrictions of the Versailles Treaty. The Germans took unbelievably huge risks in mounting their main attack through the Ardennes where there were few roads and some well-aimed air or artillery attacks could have upset the whole German plan. It is true that the Luftwaffe had aerial superiority but the author shows that large numbers of French aircraft were inexplicably never sent into battle (the French Air Force had more aircraft available at the end of the campaign than at the beginning!) French troops fought valiantly in many engagements, especially in holding the perimeter at Dunkirk allowing many more men to escape back to England. This disproves the claim that all French felt resentment to the British or were not willing to fight to save their country.
So, the question remains, what brought about the sudden collapse? Once Petain started talking about an armistice, resistance collapsed. The military setbacks were exploited by unscrupulous anti-republican leaders like Petain, Laval and Weygand in order to overthrow the hated republican regime.
The disgrace of France in 1940 was not that they were defeated on the battlefield in metropolitan France. The British, Russians and Americans also suffered grievous setbacks early in the war before turning things around. The disgrace is that (1) they refused to continue the war from their colonies in North Africa where they could be protected by their powerful navy, (2) they accepted humiliating, immoral armistice terms that forced 1.5 million French POW's to remain interned for the duration of the war and agreeing to hand over refugees who had found haven from the Nazis in democratic France, many of whom were subsequently murdered and (3) the pro-republican leaders (especially the Socialists) allowed themselves to be meekly stampeded into voting the republican regime out of existence and granted unlimited dictatorial powers to Petain who then set up a new regime called the "French State" (instead of "Republic") which instituted a totalitarian regime that ultimately arrested the former leaders of the republic and other opponents (even murdering some of them like Mandel and Zay), handed Jews over to the Nazis to be annihilated and, finally, openly collaborating with them to the point of even agreeing to supplying the Germans with forced labor. Shirer mentions at the end of the book that many patriotic Frenchmen, years after the war, felt that their leaders were right in capitulating because "it saved another bloodbath like that of 1914-1918". Shirer points out that France's freedom was restored by the sacrifice of millions of Russian, British and American lives (among others). I think this obtuseness, or, alternately, a strong feeling of shame, explains why many Frenchmen have such a prickly attitude to Americans.
The lesson of this book is that a nation can have all the material, technological and military advantages but without internal solidarity, a sense of national dignity and a will to make sacrifices for its freedom, it can fall in an instant. This should serve as a warning for future generations.

One cannot gain an understanding of the American Civil War, (as well as the periods preceding it and following it), unless one eventually learns to see it through the eyes of the people who lived it. This book is presents the reader with just such an opportunity.

The author follows the lives of two men from two completely different societies, through their youth, their adolescence and young adulthood, through the War and to the time where their paths cross in the battle on Little Round Top in July 1863, through the remainder of the war and its aftermath, right into old age. Each is affected by the society which surrounds him, each man embodies the best and the worst of those societies and each is motivated to fight in their defense. There's no hero worship here; each man is presented as being quite human. Yet, each man remains quite likeable in his own way.

There's some surprises as well. Chamberlain was played by Jeff Daniels in the movie "Gettysburg". In that movie Chamberlain gives an impassioned speech to his troops about being "...an army out to set other men free..." The real Chamberlain wasn't a friend of slavery but he was no abolitionist either. Oates, for his part, (and much to my surpise), was one of the first officers to officially lobby the Confederate Congress for the enlistment of slaves early in 1863. (He was unsuccessful in his attempt).

If I haven't given the book 5 stars it's because the author's writing style is a bit on the ponderous side. Nonetheless, this is the kind of book that you'll need to have in your library if your interest in the period is a serious one. Go experience it for yourself!

So many books have been written about the Civil War that Conceived In Liberty might seem to be more of the same. But the book clears new ground on Joshua Chamberlain, by noting that this "marble man" of the North had blemishes of his own -- as did his counterpart, Col. William Oates of Alabama (the other subject of this first-rate dual biography.

I have read a number of books on Joshua Chamberlain and have always thought that there was another side to the man: that he was not simply a great hero, but also a soldier who was thoughtful, and deeply disturbed by the conflict. Perry adds the balance that is so desperately needed to our knowledge of Joshua Chamberlain, then completes the portrait by counterposing his life with that of William Oates.

These two men not only met at Gettysburg, but they are symbols of the larger issues that consumed our nation in the nineteenth century. Filled with information and anecdotal accounts of the lives of both men (incidents that appear in no other work on either Chamberlain or Oates) Conceived In Liberty is not only well-researched it is a fantastic read. This book is long overdue.

Yes, Conceived In Liberty is controversial, but that is its value. Perry is a courageous writer and a first-rate historian.

The Civil War was, in some ways, our own clash of cultures that ended up with us having a stronger, and more philisophically harmonic country than we had then. After the war we no longer were "Those United States" but "These United States".

While it took longer (and still has not taken root) for some Southern areas to accept that they have changed because of the war, this book outlines in a fascinating fashion why the American Dream was won in 1865.

Joshua Chamberlain and William Oates are both opposing personalities. Chamberlain was a professor, Oates a laborer. Chamberlain was a respected fellow before the war. Oates was much less.. even going into hiding at one point from the law.

What they had in common was a belief that they had gone as far as they could in their lives before the war. Chamberlain was forever going to be a professor. Oates forever a laborer.

Both faced each other in Gettysburg. While Chamberlain was the hero of Little Top in that battle, Oates eventually had a longer and more productive politcal life than Chamberlain.

Neither of these men won their positions by birth, wealth, or by the inner workings of a political machine. They won their positions by hard work, and the admiration of their men in battle and the people they fought for.

While it may have been possible prior to the Civil War for these men to have done so (Abraham Lincoln is a prime example) the fact is that the Southern philosophy was beaten in 1865, and the Northern philosophy of hard work, and position by trust and admiration rather than birth, and wealth won out and both sides reaped benefits and still are from that day.

Shakespeare's Othello is an interesting and dramatic tragedy. If you like imagery and irony, you will like Othello. Shakespeare uses the power of imagery skillfully to develop themes throughout the play. For example, recurring animal imagery is used to sharpen the contrast between people and beasts, showing how Iago and Othello begin to act more like beasts than human beings. Irony also adds much to the plot of Othello to make it interesting and exciting for the reader. Much of the irony used is dramatic irony because the reader knows of Iago's plot, while the characters in the play have no idea what is about to unfold. The relationship between men and women in Othello is another aspect of the play that makes it interesting to read. Iago's wife Emilia, for example, is very cynical towards men, probably from years of living with Iago. Othello and Desdemona's relationship is also intriguing. In the beginning of the play, Othello and Desdemona are seemingly deeply in love with each other. Othello, however, is rather easily convinced that his wife is cheating on him and becomes angry to the point where he cannot forgive Desdemona. He decides to kill her. As she is being murdered, Desdemona tries to protect her husband's innocence in her own murder. Another interesting aspect of the play which makes it stand out from other Shakespearean plays is the race of the main character. Othello is black and a Moor, or Muslim. This fact brings up issues to be explored in the play. Shakespeare shows the characters being separated not only by status and rank but also by their place of origin and their religion. Overall, Shakespeare's Othello is dramatic, well-written, and thoroughly explores how evil a human being can become.

Othello relects the true meaning of a tragedy both in its content and its structure.Tragedy is 'a story of exceptional calamity produced by human actions, leading to the death of a man in high estate.'The downfall of Othello is caused by his own actions, rather than by his character, or rather the two work in unison to create the stage for his downfall.
This is what captured my attention when I read this play.It is very profound to realize the fact that Shakespeare uses Iago to set this stage on which Othello is a mere player.
I love the character of Iago. His total confidence, the superiority that he feels when psychoanalysing human nature, his rational thinking and intellectualism sways the reader to think: 'Wow, this is a compelling and sophisticated man we're dealing with here!'
However, my admiration of Iago does not in anyway undermine my love of Othello. His poetic and calm demeanor makes the reader feel the pity and terror for him when he falls from grace (catharsis). Yet, we are made to understand that the reason why he is made to appear a gullible and ignorant fool to some readers is that he does not have any knowledge of a delicate, domesticated life. Venetian women were foreign to him. This tragic flaw in Othello added to the circumstances used by Iago to destroy him.
The meaning, and hence the tragedy of the play is conveyed through the use of Shakespeare's language, style, literary devices and imagery. Without these dramatic effects, readers would never be able to enjoy the play as much, although the dialogue is at times difficult to decipher.
I thoroughly enjoyed Othello and it is my hope that more people find it enticing as I have. I would be delighted to contribute more of my reviews to that effect.

As a play, "Othello" encompasses many things but more than anything else it is a study of pure evil. Although Othello is an accomplished professional soldier and a hero of sorts, he is also a minority and an outcast in many ways. As a Black man and a Moor (which means he's a Moslem), Othello has at least two qualities, which make him stand out in the Elizabethan world. He is also married to a Caucasian woman named Desdemona, which creates an undercurrent of hostility as evidenced by the derogatory remark "the ram hath topped the ewe".

Othello's problems begin when he promotes one of his soldiers, Michael Cassio as his lieutenant. This arouses the jealousy and hatred of one of his other soldiers, Iago who hatches a plot to destroy Othello and Michael Cassio. When Cassio injures an opponent in a fight he is rebuked, punished, and subsequently ignored by Othello who must discipline him and teach him a lesson. Iago convinces Desdemona to intervene on Cassio's behalf and then begins to convince Othello that Desdemona is in love with Cassio.

This is actually one of the most difficult Shakespeare plays to watch because the audience sees the plot begin to unfold and is tormented by Othello's gradual decent into Iago's trap. As with other Shakespeare plays, the critical components of this one are revealed by language. When Othello is eventually convinced of Cassio's treachery, he condemns him and promotes Iago in his place. When Othello tells Iago that he has made him his lieutenant, Iago responds with the chilling line, "I am thine forever". To Othello this is a simple affirmation of loyalty, but to the audience, this phrase contains a double meaning. With these words, Iago indicates that the promotion does not provide him with sufficient satisfaction and that he will continue to torment and destroy Othello. It is his murderous intentions, not his loyal service that will be with Othello forever.

Iago's promotion provides him with closer proximity to Othello and provides him with more of his victim's trust. From here Iago is easily able to persuade Othello of Desdemona's purported infidelity. Soon Othello begins to confront Desdemona who naturally protests her innocence. In another revealing statement, Othello demands that Desdemona give him "the ocular proof". Like Iago's earlier statement, this one contains a double meaning that is not apparent to the recipient but that is very clear to the audience who understands the true origin of Othello's jealousy. Othello's jealousy is an invisible enemy and it is also based on events that never took place. How can Desdemona give Othello visual evidence of her innocence if her guilt is predicated on accusations that have no true shape or form? She can't. Othello is asking Desdemona to do the impossible, which means that her subsequent murder is only a matter of course.

I know that to a lot of young people this play must seem dreadfully boring and meaningless. One thing you can keep in mind is that the audience in Shakespeare's time did not have the benefit of cool things such as movies, and videos. The downside of this is that Shakespeare's plays are not visually stimulating to an audience accustomed to today's entertainment media. But the upside is that since Shakespeare had to tell a complex story with simple tools, he relied heavily on an imaginative use of language and symbols. Think of what it meant to an all White audience in a very prejudiced time to have a Black man at the center of a play. That character really stood out-almost like an island. He was vulnerable and exposed to attitudes that he could not perceive directly but which he must have sensed in some way.

Shakespeare set this play in two locations, Italy and Cypress. To an Elizabethan audience, Italy represented an exotic place that was the crossroads of many different civilizations. It was the one place where a Black man could conceivably hold a position of authority. Remember that Othello is a mercenary leader. He doesn't command a standing army and doesn't belong to any country. He is referred to as "the Moor" which means he could be from any part of the Arab world from Southern Spain to Indonesia. He has no institutional or national identity but is almost referred to as a phenomenon. (For all the criticism he has received in this department, Shakespeare was extrordinarlily attuned to racism and in this sense he was well ahead of his time.) Othello's subsequent commission as the Military Governor of Cypress dispatches him to an even more remote and isolated location. The man who stands out like an island is sent to an island. His exposure and vulnerability are doubled just as a jealous and murderous psychopath decides to destroy him.

Iago is probably the only one of Shakespeare's villains who is evil in a clinical sense rather than a human one. In Kind Lear, Edmund the bastard hatches a murderous plot out of jealousy that is similar to Iago's. But unlike Iago, he expresses remorse and attempts some form of restitution at the end of the play. In the Histories, characters like Richard III behave in a murderous fashion, but within the extreme, political environment in which they operate, we can understand their motives even if we don't agree with them. Iago, however, is a different animal. His motives are understandable up to the point in which he destroys Michael Cassio but then they spin off into an inexplicable orbit of their own. Some have suggested that Iago is sexually attracted to Othello, which (if its true) adds another meaning to the phrase "I am thine forever". But even if we buy the argument that Iago is a murderous homosexual, this still doesn't explain why he must destroy Othello. Oscar Wilde once wrote very beautifully of the destructive impact a person can willfully or unwittingly have on a lover ("for each man kills the things he loves") but this is not born out in the play. Instead, Shakespeare introduces us to a new literary character-a person motivated by inexplicable evil that is an entity in itself. One of the great ironies of this play is that Othello is a character of tragically visible proportions while Iago is one with lethally invisible ones.

A woman 107 years old, slowly reveals that she is the original Biograph Girl to a writer who is looking to create a free lance article on aging. Richard Murphy discovers the story of his life. As others become involved in this project, inclujding his twin brother, Ben, who is looking for a cinematic project after a dearth of ten years from his only success. Florence Bridgewood becomes Florence Lawrence. Asa she changes, Flo begins to understand the process of her life. Richard and Ben revisit their rivalry, their love lives, successes and defeats. Ultimately they discover what Flo sees - everything is where it is supposed to be.

Mann's style involves interspersing chapters of Flo's narrative of her life to Richard and Ben with chapters from the present. This demonstrates many similarities of the early period of film making with the contemporary. This style also helps create characters as foils from one period to another.

Flo's life is intriguing, albeit sometimes contrived as the McKinley chapter appears. But one is able to see through Mann's writing how Bridgewood becomes Lawrence who becomes Bridgewood again. These metamorphoses help all main characters understand how change can be developmental or harmful. Ultimately the reader can judge whether what could have been.

Florence Lawrence, the world's first movie star. Never heard of her? Well, neither had I, as a amateur film buff, until I picked up William Mann's delightful, compelling book, "The Biograph Girl".

In this entertaining story, he weaves fact and fiction together flawlessly, creating a wonderful "what if" scenario that is very realistic. What if Florence Lawrence didn't die after ingesting ant paste, but lived out an entirely new life under another name, only to resurface as a fiesty 106 year old?

The older Flo is dynamic, witty, and easy to love. She is both honest and coy, a great character to drive the plot but also maintains her air of mystery throughout the story.

All of the supporting characters in the story are wonderfully drawn, have complete lives of their own, and are all consumed by this lady and her story. Mann steers away from stereotyping characters, for example Sister Jean, who is Flo's caregiver, could have been saintly and pristine. Instead, Mann makes her worldwise, and harbors a secret past. Richard's ex-porn star boyfriend is part of a committed relationship. Anita is an aspiring actress who holds her career back for love. Mann avoids the obvious, which is delightfully refreshing.

This book is a very easy read, and one that you won't want to put down. In fact, I hope this book propels people to start looking at the early history of film once again, not as an archaic dinosaur, but as a living, thriving, and very real entity as symbolized by the lovely Flo.

I heartily recommend this book!

If one is fond of stories about old Hollywood, or murder mysteries, or simply want a days EXCELLENT entertainment this is the book for you. It tells the fictionalized story of Florence Lawrence, the first movie star. She is 106 years old and discovered by a journalist who, after some good investigating, finds out she is the long 'dead' star who died of eating ant paste in the 30's.

I have to say I read this 457 page book non-stop over one lovely Sunday and it kept me from glancing up at the Tv, or any of a number of disctractions...it was wonderful and magical and a thrill to read. I recommended it to anyone--young, old, interested in history or just simply needing a day or twos entertainment!