Having worked in the heavy industrial electrical/mechanical field for the past 26 years, I have worked at many facilities similiar to those illustrated in this book. I love them! You can say what you'd like regarding their environmental impact, but I can tell you, these are great places to work. The process is usually very interesting, and the customer most always demands a quality job. So...there's some polution, but not one of you reading this review can say that your purchasing habits, and style of life has not contributed to the very images that you would now turn your nose up at. Sure, the EPA would love to have you believe that they are cleaning up the world, when the fact is, they are only driving real industry out of the USA, only to produce the same if not more 'polution' over the borders. And with our governments blessing. 'Still buying the same products, are you not? Look and see where they were made next time! It makes me sad to see these big industrial sites closed down. I love the book, because I can show my kids, and my grandkids the types of places that used to exist in this country_The type of places that has enabled us to go around as the police department of the world, and enforce what WE deem as right on every continent of the earth. It would have made a nice closing statement though, if you would have included an arial shot of the Pulp & Paper Mill that produced the pages of this book. I am assuming that is, that they were made in the USA.

This is a delightful introduction to probability and mathematical statistics. There are already quite a few nice probability texts at this level (Jim Pitman's PROBABILITY is a favorite of mine) and many serviceable introductions to mathematical statistics (Rice's MATHEMATICAL STATISTICS AND DATA ANALYSIS and Cassella & Berger's STATISTICAL INFERENCE are good examples), but Williams is very different from these. He manages to teach a lot of beautiful probability along with some practical statistics. The approach is thoroughly modern (including in depth coverage of modern Bayesian methods) and reasonably applied (much more applied than you would expect from his other books). He is opinionated, but never boring.

The only negatives I can think of are (1) too few problems, especially easy problems; (2) quite a few typos--it's a first printing; and (3) some asides, especially on measure theoretic issues, that the target audience may find more confusing than helpful.

I wish this book had been around when I first studied this material.

As a student of American literature and a creative writer myself, I have to say that Williams provides the most convincing and powerfully written explanation of what it means to be an American author. I would urge anyone with an interest in American literature to buy this book, you will not regret it.

This is such a great book. I originally got it for a Park Resource Management class while pursuing my Master's degree. This is definitely one of those books that you hang on to after you finish the class.

Wildland Recreation has so many different resources. There are pictures, charts, graphs, diagrams, and my favorite- case studies and examples of research. It is a great reference to use when writing papers or doing other research, because you can go look up the study. Not only that, but at the end of each chapter, all the references are provided, making it easy to search for what you need outside of this book.

Wildland Recreation is well written and understandable. The information is clear and straightforward, easy to comprehend. The chapters and sections are nicely divided into categories. This is a great book for anyone interested in any aspect of wildland management.

This book brings the words and images of Blake to brilliant life. The volume is gorgeous, and the colors extremely rich. Having read Blake's poetry in un-illuminated format before, I now am even more appreciative of the value of seeing the work as Blake originally intended. Blake is a marvelous poet and artist, and this collection of his illuminated work is a marvelous book.

David Crouch's biography of William Marshal, an icon in his own time, a courtier and knight who served five kings--Henry II, Henry the Young King, Richard the Lionheart, John, and Henry III--as well as a queen, Eleanor of Aquitane, coming to represent the ideal of the corteis (courtly) to his peers and the embodiment of chevalerie for those who have since studied the period, does much to ground the legend and question earlier interpretations that often accepted the contemporary accounts of Marshal's life at face value. Earlier biographers, such as Painter and the French doyen of medieval history, Georges Duby, based much of their understanding of Marshal's life upon the posthumous "Histoire de Guillaume le Mareschal," a still extant epic poem commissioned by Marshal's sons and followers to celebrate his life and many accomplishments. Surprisingly, previous writers have chosen to base their biographies, especially Duby, almost entirely upon what is obviously, regardless of any factual accounting, a suspect source, in doing so ignoring other contemporary documents that go a long way to tempering the portrait of Marshal, not only in the "Historie" but in the subsequent biographies from which they were based.

Instead of the chivalric hero of battlefield and tournament cast in the mold of Chretien de Troyes, or the often fortunate simpleton of Duby that rose to the heights of medieval society through the sheer prowess of his arms, in Crouch we find a poor, relatively minor-born knight who through valor and shrewd financial self-interest uses both the battle and tournament field to promote his own fortunes, aided at times by pure good luck, which he is quick to turn to his own advantage. Upon entry to the courts of the powerful we discover a man who was deft in manipulating the intrigues of his betters for his own benefit, quick to ally himself with those who could help him, adept at playing one party off against another, and, when his politics stumbled, able to ultimately survive and reverse his misfortunes where other men fell. Charismatic, he both received and demanded loyalty from the mesnie and supporters that surrounded him. Generous to his followers, he could be equally stern and unforgiving to those that opposed him, in many ways reflecting the values of the aristocratic society of which he was a part. At the end, he survived both rebellions and the displeasure of the kings whom he served, becoming one of England's most powerful magnates and regent for Henry III, in effect ruling England in the boy king's stead.

The author uses his biography to examine the role of the mesnie in 12th century medieval society, as well as the function of the tournament, both as a social phenomenon and an avenue for advancement, both financial and social. He investigates the evolving notion of chivalry, both as an ideal and its actual practice. And he makes a cursory foray into the influence of religion, especially as it pertained to the noble's household, with its dependence upon an administration of clerical clerks. As much an insight into medieval military and noble society as a biography, the author has leavened his account with some wonderful anecdotes, such as Richard I's remonstrance with Marshal against killing him in battle, and Henry II's pique with his son over the latter's crossbowmen firing at him during a period of The Young King's insurrection. The various interactions and shifting allegiances between King Henry II and his often recalcitrant sons is illuminating in itself. Though Marshal was often out of the king's favor, Henry II nonetheless twice requested that Marshal serve his son, even though the son was at war with his father, and Marshal's military skills and allegiance would be turned against him! Quite a different mindset than what we're accustomed to today.

At present, this must be considered the definitive biography of a medieval icon who not only influenced his own times, but the imaginations of subsequent generations. I suspect that many who read this account will be left wishing for more. Both the Painter and Duby biographies have their value, though the former has long been out of print and will require some effort to find. Read their accounts, then use this book to place their flaws in perspective. Also, Crouch indicates that the original "Historie" will soon be available in translation.

An exceptional book, and very highly recommended. My only complaint is that the price asked by the publisher is preposterous.

This is the second volume of Lane's tremendous work on Hebrews. If the work of Attridge (1989, Hermeneia), was ground breaking, Lane's work is earth shattering! The best detailed and technical work available, yet it is quite lucid for the informed layperson. If you know the Greek alphabet and can use an interlinear, you can use this work with great benefit. It is a goldmine for Greek students, pastors and teachers.

Oh my god. Oh my everlovin god! I don't use the word "super" very often, but this book is super, damned super, totally super, even really super. I used to think Wordsworth was such a totally dry whiny-boy bore, but now--HOLY COW! This Collings character is great. I don't know what he did to Wordsworth but I liked it and I want more! The only thing that is too much with this book is quality. It is that good. Period. I recommend this book to, doy, everyone. To readers with children who read also-- "dismemberment" is not as dirty as it sounds, no, wait, yes it is.

"Much Ado About Nothing" is a beautifully made, performed, and directed film by the incomparable Kenneth Branaugh. This film includes an all-star cast that give wonderful performances and draw you into the lives of the characters. The plot is somewhat complicated, so I'll give a general version. The film is basically about love, misunderstanding, scandal, revenge, virtue, and bravery. That's a lot for one film, but believe me, it's all in there!

Kenneth Branaugh, Emma Thompson, Denzel Washington, Keanu Reeves, and Michael Keaton give excellent performances in this film that you wouldn't want to miss. Although the film is a period piece and the Shakespearean language is used, you will have no difficulty understanding it perfectly.

The scenery and landscape in this film are exquisite as well. I never thought there could be such a beautiful, untouched place like that on earth. I would suggest watching the film just for the beautiful landscape, but it's the performances and the story that you should really pay attention to.

Anyone who loves Shakespeare would absolutely love this film! Anyone who loves Kenneth Branaugh and what he has done for Shakespeare in the past 10 or 15 years will appreciate this film as well! There isn't one bad thing I can say about this film. Definitely watch it, you won't be disappointed!!!

One of the problems with Shakespeare's comedies, an English professor once told me, is that they are not funny. Now, this is not to say that Shakespeare was a bad comedy writer, or that this professor had no sense of humour. In fact, quite the opposite--he had turned his sense of humour and love of humour into an academic career in pursuit of humour.

What he meant by the comment was, humour is most often a culture-specific thing. It is of a time, place, people, and situation--there is very little by way of universal humour in any language construction. Perhaps a pie in the face (or some variant thereof) does have some degree of cross-cultural appeal, but even that has less universality than we would often suppose.

Thus, when I suggested to him that we go see this film when it came out, he was not enthusiastic. He confessed to me afterward that he only did it because he had picked the last film, and intended to require the next two selections when this film turned out to be a bore. He also then confessed that he was wrong.

Brannagh managed in his way to carry much of the humour of this play into the twentieth century in an accessible way -- true, the audience was often silent at word-plays that might have had the Elizabethan audiences roaring, but there was enough in the action, the acting, the nuance and building up of situations to convey the same amount of humour to today's audience that Shakespeare most likely intended for his groups in the balconies and the pit.

The film stars Kenneth Brannagh (who also adapted the play for screen) and Emma Thompson as Benedict and Beatrice, the two central characters. They did their usual good job, with occasional flashes of excellence. Alas, I'll never see Michael Keaton as a Shakespearean actor, but he did a servicable job in the role of the constable (and I shall always remember that 'he is an ass') -- the use of his sidekick as the 'horse' who clomps around has to be a recollection of Monty Python and the Holy Grail, where their 'horses' are sidekicks clapping coconut shells together.

I'll also not see Keanu Reeves as a Shakespearean, yet he was perhaps too well known (type-cast, perhaps) in other ways to pull off the brief-appearing villian in this film.

Lavish sets and costumes accentuate the Italianate-yet-very-English feel of this play. This film succeeds in presenting an excellent but lesser-known Shakespeare work to the public in a way that the public can enjoy.

I saw this movie when I was fairly young. I admit that I couldn't understand much of what was going on let along what was being said (I was nine, I wasn't exactly fluent in Olde English). Since then I've watched it many times. Not only do I understand it now, but I fully apreciate how good it is.

The movie is a very good adaptation of the play. The impressive lines that Shakespeare wrote were generally given new life in their delivery. Also, I must compliment Michael Keaton on his role. It isn't a very big one, but if you watch this movie, you'll understand why I mentioned it. Overall, this is simply a fully enjoyable movie, whether you're a fan of Shakespeare or not.

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.