Bob, a big-game hunter shipwrecked off a remote island, encounters Zaroff (Leslie Banks). Typical of guys named "Bob," Bob (Joel McCrea) is handsome and rugged. Zaroff is wide-eyed and quite mad on the subject of hunting. Finding that animals are a lesser challenge, Zaroff moved on to hunting humans. Zaroff's houseguests, Eve (Fay Wray) and her drunken brother Martin (Robert Armstrong), were also shipwrecked. It seems that Zaroff keeps moving the buoys. Since Bob is a famous hunter, Zaroff finds particular pleasure in making him the prey. After Martin disappears, Bob and the delectable Eve get a head start. Zaroff releases the pack, and the grim fun begins. If nothing else, this old movie proves that it is possible to make a great action/suspense flick without fiery explosions, computer-generated FX, and stylized violence. Since some of the same people who made "King Kong" also made this flick, it has a familiar look, even for a first time viewer. For example, Bob and Eve race across the log bridge where Kong encountered the sailors, albeit from the opposite direction. Eve wears a tattered dress, much the same as the famous one in "Kong." Nobody looks better in revealing rags than Fay Wray. There aren't any giant monsters running through this murky jungle. Zaroff is monstrous enough. Finally, Zaroff gets the point of the real danger. The stone-faced Noble Johnson is around as one of Zaroff's menacing minions. The story races right along and doesn't waste time on subplots. Based on the often-anthologized story by Richard Connell, this little film is a good change of pace. ;-)

Still the best screen adaptation of one of the great short stories of all time. The theme of Richard Connell's masterpiece has been used countless times, from "Woman Hunt" to "Slavegirls from Beyond Infinity." The movie was made on the set of "King Kong," and Fay Wray, Robert Armstrong, and Noble Johnson were in both. Total running time may be short, but it's still longer than it takes to read the story.

In the original, the only characters on the island are Zaroff, his servant, and the shipwrecked Rainsford. Naturally, though, Hollywood needed romance, so Fay Wray, no stranger to playing a damsel in distress, makes a fine heroine. Robert Armstrong, on the other hand, grossly overplays the part of the drunken American boor. But overall, it's a good, enjoyable picture.

By the way, the original story is politically incorrect from every angle and could not possibly be faithfully adapted to the screen today. (Zaroff expounds on how easy it is to hunt men of certain races.) And some otherwise intelligent people insist that "dangerous game" in the title refers to the game Zaroff plays of hunting humans. But it obviously means that, for the hunter, the most dangerous game to stalk is man.

Most film viewers are familar with the great horror movies of the early 1930's: Dracula, Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein, The Mummy, King Kong, etc. This title belongs in this group! The Most Dangerous Game has a great cast (Joel McCrea as big game hunter Sanger Rainsford; Fay Wray as the beautiful Eve; and Leslie Banks as the sinister General Zaroff); compelling plot (General Zaroff hunts humans on his private island); energetic pacing (the movie runs approximately 62 minutes); high production values (many exterior scenes were filmed from same set as King Kong); and a memorable music score (Max Steiner). What is so amazing about this movie is that all of the above elements came together in a movie that was shot in about 30 days with a limited budget.

The Criterion print of The Most Dangerous Game is excellent - the best print I have ever seen of the movie. Most of the prints available previously on inexpensive videotapes are very poor. In addition, the critic commentary by film historian Bruce Kawin is an added bonus to the Criterion offering.

This abridged version of the bestselling book is narrated by the author himself, and it takes a little listening to get past the sheer dryness of the voice. Fortunately, his fascinating subject matter shines through, telling a captivating tale of prion diseases (most famously, Mad Cow Disease in Europe) as they've made their way through the food chain and into human beings.

Rhodes' predictions are a little grim, and the book does not end on a happy note. But though his style is sensationalistic at times, you can't flaw Rhodes' research or the suspense-filled way he lays out the facts.

When you finish this book (IF you have the stomach to finish), you WILL reassess your meat-eating habits. You will squirm and wonder if it's not already too late. Rhodes sets himself up as a prophet of doom and he delivers most capably, with all the meticulous scientific detail modern readers expect.

Deadly Feasts will creep you out, but also send you scurrying to buy copies for your friends, neighbours and probably your local butcher, too. You'll regret having read it, but you'll never forgive yourself if you don't...

You might think you're not interested in prion diseases, or maybe you're not worried because Mad Cow and its grim relatives will never cross the ocean to North America. Perhaps you even believe that as a vegetarian, these issues could never affect you. In "Deadly Feasts," Richard Rhodes shows in gruesome detail how very wrong you may be in those assumptions.

Skilfully, Rhodes tells a captivating tale of prion diseases as they've made their way through the food chain and into human beings. Rhodes' predictions are grim, and the book does not end on a happy note. But though his style is sensationalistic at times, you can't flaw Rhodes' research or the suspense-filled way he lays out the facts.

When you finish this book (IF you have the stomach to finish), you WILL reassess your meat-eating habits. You will squirm and wonder if it's not already too late. Rhodes sets himself up as a prophet of doom and he delivers most capably, with all the meticulous scientific detail modern readers expect.

Deadly Feasts will creep you out, but also send you scurrying to buy copies for your friends, neighbours and probably your local butcher, too. You'll regret having read it, but you'll never forgive yourself if you don't...

A lot of folks are getting concerned about Mad Cow disease not only because of what happened in Britain, but what could or may already be happening here.
A very interesting book that never lets up. Another front revealed to show that we are really in more trouble than we realize as far as health is concerned.
Not a book to be missed.

If you have any experience at all reading the whodunit type of mystery story, you will know within the first two chapters who the murderer is in this story. If that's all you care about, you'll be tempted to stop. My advice? DON'T !!!

Eyes of a Child is one of the best mystery novels I have ever read, and I picked it up by accident, thinking it was by another author. Lucky accident! The story is told largely through the eyes of Teresa Peralta, a young hispanic legal assistant in San Francisco, whose husband of six years, Richie, is murdered just before she leaves to go to Venice with her boss and lover, Christopher Paget, a major character carried over from a previous Patterson novel. We know Chris can't possibly be the murderer, because he's the good guy in the previous book, so we're left with only one possible suspect-- so there's no mystery at all about 'whodunit.' In spite of that, the book is a terrific mystery-- not about who, but about how and why.

The 'victim' is a slimeball of major proportions. He's killed in the first few pages. Then, through flashbacks, we're taken through the last few months before his demise. By the time he finally gets what's coming to him, we're ready to go to SanFran and kill him ourselves!

The dramatic insensity picks up when Christopher is arrested and tried for the murder. We know he didn't do it, but his efforts to prove his innocence in the face of many facts that make him look guilty provides the terrific suspense. The outcome is unexpected and exciting.

But I'm missing the main point here: This is no ordinary mystery story, and the plot pales in comparison to some other issues. These are 'real' people. We care about them. We care what happens to them. We want Christopher to 'get off' without revealing to the authorities who the real killer is, because the murderer has done society an immense service and deserves to remain unidentified and free.

Although the adult characters make the plot move, it is a child who is the center of the story-- hence the title. Teresa's daughter is one of the most haunting and sympathetic characters you will ever encounter in literature. What happens to her along the way is far more important in the long run than the more prosaic question of who is 'victim' and who is 'murderer.'

I have only two minor complaints: 1. A couple of the characters easily arrive at insights into their own personalities that no real-life person could similarly achieve, and 2. They are able to articulate these insights more clearly than any similar real person could. In other words, the author puts words in their mouths for them. This damages the illusion of reality in a couple of spots. However, the book's many strengths far outweigh these piddly weaknesses.

A fascinating read. I can't recommend it highly enough.

RNPATTERSON WRITES BOOKS YOU JUST DON'T WANT TO PUT DOWN. THE CHARACTERS ARE WELL DEVELOPED AND I FOUND MYSELF HATING RICKY BUT LOVING THE OTHERS, EXCEPT CHRIS. I COULDN'T FIGURE OUT WHAT HE WAS UP TO BECAUSE HE WAS KEEPING SOMETHING TO HIMSELF AND I DIDN'T KNOW WHICH WAY TO GO WITH HIM. EVEN WHEN HE WAS ON TRIAL FOR KILLING A SOCIOPATH I ALONG WIH HIS LAWYER DIDN'T FEEL HE WAS REALLY NOT GUILTY. PATTESON HAS THE KNACK OF KEEPING YOU INTERESTED IN ALL THE ACTION, DETAILS, AND HOW A GOOD DEFENSE LAWYER HAS TO THINK AHEAD AND WEAVE THE LOOSE ENDS INTO A SOLID LEGAL DEFENSE FOR HER CLIENT. I THINK SHE'S BETTER THAN GRISHAM'S LAWYERS. AT TIMES I LOST PATIENCE WITH TERRI WHO WAS CONFUSED AS TO WHAT SHE SHOULD DO TO PROTECT HER FIVE YEAR OLD DAUGHTER WHO WAS ALSO CONFUSED RE HER PARENTS' LOVE FOR HER. THIS WAS AN EXCELLENT READ THAT KEPT ME GUESSING RIGHT UP TO THE UNEXPECTED ENDING. IF YOU HAVEN'T READ ANY OF PATTERSON' BOOKS, GET STARTED. THIS IS HIS 6th NOVEL SO START BACK BEFORE THIS 1994 BOOK.

This is only my second RN Patterson book, but wow, what a find! I can't wait to go back and get them all.
"Eyes of a Child" is one heck of a story, that grips you right from its chilling opening until it's shattering finale.
The characterizations are richly drawn and extremely credible. Patterson's way with setting up compelling dramatic scenes is amazing. There's one long scene in the book where Terri and her mother Rosa finally discuss why Rosa stayed with the abusive husband. It's forthright, somber, believable and sad, as well. Patterson does this kind of great work in other scenes, too, including the one where Terri comes to find out her daughter, Elena's, horrifying "secret."
Christopher Paget is a noble hero, and I didn't realize he has been featured in other novels, so I was beginning to think he was the murderer. His trip to the Goodwill is one factor; the "journal" is another.
All of the characters are brilliantly conceived: the evil and despicable Richie, whose death seems more than justified; Paget's teen-age son, Carlo, trapped in those waning years between adolescence and adulthood; Rosa, the mother, is compelling and one can't help but sympathize with her; Caroline Masters, Paget's defense, who is a brilliant lawyer and seems to be a true friend as well.
There are no easy answers in this well-crafted novel and our heroes do some foolish things, but it chronicles the tragedy of what happens when a child is placed in a "used" position, and how sometimes even love isn't enough.
EXCELLENT!
HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.

Yes, it's a great novel. Yes the language is rich, the story is subtle, and the psychology is complex. And yet, I didn't like it.

Of course, who am I to review Henry James? Granted, I read more books and watch less television than most of my peers, but still I think I might be too "late Twentieth Century" for this book. Maybe despite my strict avoidance of video games I just can't help detesting the millipede pace of this book. I've never had much affinity for drawing room conversations to begin with, and unlike my father I don't believe that wit must be meted out in tortuous sentences.

But it isn't my background or personal prejudices that make me recoil from "Wings of the Dove". There is something about the deliberate quality of Henry James that bothers me. He knows perfectly well what he's doing with his fat succulent sentences. He won't feed you a meal of lean pork and vegetables. He'll serve you tons of tiny truffles and oil-oozing, crispy skinned duck.

To read "Wings of the Dove" is like encountering a cookbook that decided to include as much of the delicious fatty foods as possible. Of course its a rare meal and quite wonderful in its way. But some how, it made me a little nauseous at the end.

First things first, it is a very nice novel, but very hard to follow. Personally speaking, sometimes I couldn't get very exactly what Henry James was trying to say, but I could understand the situation as a whole and be able to move on.

As everybody knows, Hery James is not an easy writer. His appeal is very difficult and complex although it doesn't read very old-fashioned. The story is very interesting and timeless, because it deals with passion, money and betrayal. The books follows Kate Croy and her beloved Merton Densher when then both get involved - in different degrees and with different interests- with the beautiful rich and sick American heiress Milly Theale.

Most of the time, the book kept me wondering what would come next and its result and the grand finale. But, that doesn't mean I was fully understand its words. As I said, I was just feeling what was going on. As a result, i don't think I was able to get all the complexity of Henry James. Maybe, if I read this book again in the futures, it will be clearer.

There is a film version of this novel made in 1997, and starring Helena Bonham Carter, Allison Elliot and Linus Roach, directed by Iain Softley. Carter is amazing as always! Kate is a bit different from the book, she is not only a manipulative soul, but, actually, she is a woman trying to find happiness. One character says of Kate, "There's something going on behind those beautiful lashes", and that's true for most female leads created by James. Watching this movie helped me a lot, after finishing reading the novel.

I've carried on a love-hate affair with The Wings of the Dove for more than 20 years. In that period of time, I started the novel (the same beautiful little Signet paperback edition) at LEAST 15 times and could never get past page 30 or so. But it kept nagging at me to read it. Last summer, I plowed through its dense prose thicket, and I felt as though I were peering through a glass darkly. Several times I felt like tossing it aside. I've studied Enlish and literature all my life and yet I had one heckuva time with those daunting banks of prose. But I'm glad I read it. It's masterful. Worth all the effort. Those scintillating scenes in Venice. Nothing like them! I just read The Golden Bowl, another difficult but rewarding book. There are astonishing scenes in it, like when the husband of the busy-body watches her in a pensive mood as if she were in the middle of a lake, coming closer. It's just an extraordinary scene! I love early James too, like that perfect jewel of a book, Washington Square. Sometimes, great as the late books are, I really do think they lose something of the wonderful clarity James achieved earlier. There are still a few scenes in Wings and Bowl, for instance, in which I have NO IDEA what James was trying to express. Talk about super subtle! But do make the effort, folks, they're incredible books.

I was pleased to learn that a new book about Gen-X feminist was taking root in American culture. And after reading the book, I'm glad it's there, and this is a good start. The authors have many insights and personal stories which help frame their arguments -- some better than others, but they are MAKING arguments instead of answering those of others, which is a big step.

My biggest criticism is that I wish they knew more women -- at least the women that I tend to know, most of whom are young and consider themselves to be feminists.

I was reading about their dinner party, where they all "bonded over STDs and abortions" While these are important issues, they do not loom over the lives of most women. The statistic that 1 out of every two people will encounter an STD and that 43% of women will have an abortion does not factor in that many women who find themselves in either situation will find themselves there more than once. (I highly recommend Susan Faludi's book BACKLASH to learn how to read statistics.)

Manifesta is truly inspirational and a call to action for all people, but third wave feminists in particular. Women today live better lives as a result of changes feminism has made in society; this book examines these changes and where we need to go in order to make more progress in the future. Manifesta also includes extensive appendices detailing a great deal of information and other media resources related to modern feminist activism.

Unlike so many publications and resources that use feminist sounding terms to sell the same old commercialism and bodily-self hatred...or openly trash the movement as outdated and irelevant, this is my generation of feminsm in it's finest form.

Both authors have a open style of writing that encourages all members of Generation X--irespective of their previous level of involvement with feminism--to find out what is really is and really is not. Having grown up without many of the gender barriers that had plauged earlier generations, we were both more conditioned to live feminism, and less aware of the need for change compared to other generations.

Yet, Richards and Baumgardner also know this juxtaposition does not mean we want to see the clock turned back on women's progress any more than previous generations of activists and current activists do. A combination of personal discussions, pop culture and political references explicitly make it clear that two young women are writing this for themselves and others who share their same perspective on life.

Although they champion second wave feminists like Gloria Steinem for reaching out to young women and trully respecting their own paths and projects, Richards and Baumgardner also do not hide disdain for feminist elders who are self-absorbed, ageist and condescending. Indeed, the authors note these women forget that long after they have passed on, the young will be left running feminist organizations---and it would be so much better if we were seriously mentored now instead of reinventing everything while simmultaneously trying to stave off attacks from our generation of the far right.

I agree with many of the reviewers below that this book was helpful and often interesting. It gives a readable orientation to one of the most important movements in the software industry today, and the editors have been fortunate to gather together so many contributors who obviously know whereof they speak. In particular, the editors' Introduction, Eric Raymond's "Brief History of Hackerdom," Richard Stallman's account of GNU and FSF, Bruce Perens's discussion of Open Source, and Tim O'Reilly's essay on "Infoware" were informative and thought-provoking.

That said, it should be noted that the Amazon reviewer above gets it wrong when she writes that the book gives a "fascinating look at the raging debate." In fact, *nothing* about Open Source is debated in this book, which is a major disappointment. As the reviewer from Princeton below notes, the goodness of everything Open Source and the badness of everything Microsoft seems to be a given for many of the writers. At the risk of criticizing the book for not being something its creators didn't intend, I think it would be greatly improved with the addition of a wider range of viewpoints and even a dissenting voice or two. (There are a number of essays that could give place to some alternate content: Eric Raymond's second essay, "The Revenge of the Hackers," leans heavily toward the self-congratulatory, as does the Netscape cheerleaders' "Story of Mozilla." And Larry Wall's "Diligence, Patience, and Humility" seems to have been included not on its own merits but on the author's reputation as the Perl Deity.)

A final wish is for the book to address a broader range of readers. As a longtime computer user but a relatively new programmer, with no formal business training, I found many of the essays to rely heavily on the jargon of hackers and MBAs. More editorial control here, in addition to a broader range of content, would make this book seem less like preaching to the choir and more effective at spreading the Open Source gospel.

This is a good idea on O'Reilly's part to try to document the history and goals of the Open Source movement, which had roots in several college campuses and research labs in the '70s and '80s, and became news in the late '90s with the popularity of Linux, Apache, and the decision of Netscape to open its browser source. The best introductory piece, however, is probably Eric Raymond's "Cathedral and the Bazaar" which is not in this book(O'Reilly publishes it separately, but it's available free on the Web and short enough to be read in one sitting). As for this collection, I liked Robert Young's business case for distributing open source - his story of how Red Hat was launched reminds me of the Compaq tale of "three guys in a restaurant". The Apache article is also quite good, and Linus Torvalds offers a brief but interesting (and characteristically opinionated) article about how Linux evolved technically. There's also a good article discussing the various open source licenses (BSD, GPL, Netscape, etc) and what they do and don't restrict.

Others I was less impressed with. Stallman's article is predictable and self-serving. He explains how he evolved his software-as-gift philosophy but doesn't come close to terms with how the software industry can support substantial employment if all source is given away. There's yet another history of the different branches of BSD Unix. There's a breathtaking inside account of the launch of Mozilla which ends with the fancy Silicon Valley party when development has finally gotten underway. The low point is Larry Wall's "essay", which is a frankly ridiculous waste of time and print.

Although this is a mixed bag, there's enough reference material and interesting points of view to keep the book around.

First of all, take a look at the list of authors. It reads as a "Who's Who" guide for the software and tools I'm running on my current system. (Kernel by Torvalds, GNU/Free Software by Stallman, Open Source Software by a number of individuals/companies (esr, Perens), development tools by Cygnus (Tiemann), DNS by Vixie, web server by Apache (Behlendorf), CGI programming in Perl by Wall, browser by Netscape (Hamerly, Paquin), Linux Distribution by RedHat (Young), and references by O'Reilly. (Of course, there should be an "et al." behind every one of these names.)

This is a great book for achieving basic literacy in the (generically-termed) Open Source movement.

By reading this book, you'll get rms' view of why software must be free. (And indeed, why it eventually will be free.) You'll also find out how some companies (like the newly-merged RedHat/Cygnus conglomerate) can thrive in a market where the product is free.

If you read *all* of the essays, you'll even find out why the Free Software Foundation's GPL does not work in some cases, and how "Open Source Software" is similar to and differs from "Free Software". (The below reviewer should be slapped with his Clue Stick for not taking the time to read and understand this important difference. ;-)

And you'll also find out why Perl (like Larry Wall himself) is so strange and brilliant at the same time.

The reason this book only gets 4 stars is due to the lack of proofing. One of Wall's diagrams is completely missing, and there are numerous typos. This is the first O'Reilly book I've seen with a lot of stupid mistakes. (And I've seen a lot of them. =)

PKG

It seems strange to be entering a rating for a novel so firmly entrenched as a classic. I really just came here looking for other readers' responses, because I have found this book, in the Everyman translation, so deadly dull that I have been using it as a soporific for over six months, and I'm still 100 pages from the end. The characters have never come to life for me; indeed the whole world of the novel seems very distant and thin. Therefore it's fascinating to read the reviews below. Am I missing some gene that makes it possible to enjoy this strange narrative?

I'm a longtime fan of this wonderful novel which until recently almost no one seemed to read. There is nothing like it in the whole of literature, and the good reader is exhilirated and refreshed by the blast of Stendhal's sustained burst of inspiration: done in six and a half weeks and he lopped off the last 150 pages at the publisher's request (and realized his mistake but couldn't find the sheets: keep looking, folks). New readers are advised to plow through the first 50 pages, which are just as good as the rest of the book but from which it is very difficult to catch the book's unique tone; the great set-piece of the Battle of Waterloo will set you straight. I'm not sure that the vaunted new Richard Howard translation is better than the reliable old waddle of the Penguin, but that might just be my hankering for a familiar flavor. But what a book! Bliss to read it, and the Duchessa Sanseverina might well be the most magnificent woman in the whole of literature; she's certainly the only woman of such stature in 19th century fiction who doesn't have to pay the price for it by a suicide in the last chapter. Much of the book's inimitable energy derives from the enjambment of a whole range of incompatibles: a story out of renaissance Italy set in post-Napoleonic times; characters simultaneously seen from the perspective of great worldly experience and that of an enthusiastic adolescence conceiving them as larger than life (Mosca and the Duchessa primarily, but also demi-villains like the Prince and the hilarious Rassi); and so on. Fabrizio is a dashing cipher, is occasionally idiotic, the very archetype of impassioned inexperience. All right, Clelia Conti is irredeemably dull in a book suffused by the Duchessa's nearly superhuman radiance, but her stint as the bird-woman of the Farnese Tower raises to the pitch of inspired looniness Stendhal's sense of the world as a place in which all essential thought and emotion are sentenced to a fugitive life and an interminable series of codes and disguises. Fabrizio's terror of engaging with his auntie the Duchessa generates the subsequent phantasmagoria of prisons, intrigues, revolutions; and yet the tone is that of some crazed, inspired operetta, the characters speak in recitative, and the multiple ironies of character and tale serve not to distance us from life, as our modern irony usually does, but to embrace an astounding range of living contradictions. A last one such: notice that despite the utter scarcity of physical description, the sensory world comes to you crystal clear, vivid as can be. Major magic working here. The book is a source of joy for anyone who enters it whole, and nothing this side of Shakespeare is as bracing. I'm so glad it's being taken up and read again.

Whether it's Thomas Hardy, Tolstoy, or Dickens, I've never met a 19th century novel I didn't like. In his 1999 book, WHY READ THE CLASSICS?, Italo Calvino calls THE CHARTERHOUSE OF PARMA "the best novel ever written," and Harold Bloom also praises it in his HOW TO READ AND WHY. Written in 52 days, THE CHARTERHOUSE OF PARMA (1839) opens amidst the rumble of cannons on the eve of the Battle of Waterloo, and then follows its young Italian protagonist, Fabrizio del Dongo, from one "nasty scrape" (p. 193) to the next. "A little drunk" (p. 46), we find our unlikely hero sleeping through the Battle of Waterloo. Later imprisoned for killing another character in a street fight, he exclaims, "I've never been so happy in my life! . . . Isn't it funny to discover that happiness was waiting for me in a prison?" (p. 327). It is in his prison cell, in the "extremely ugly" (p. 299) Farnese Tower of the fictional Citadel of Parma, that Fabrizio is transformed by love. THE CHARTERHOUSE OF PARMA may be read as a historic novel, a picaresque adventure, a love story, or simply as "a great Italian novel." As translator Richard Howard tells us in the book's Afterward, it is "a miracle of gusto, brio, elan, verve, panache" (p. 503).

G. Merritt

After reading "Beast", which I didn't like very much, I was willing to give Donna Jo Napoli another try. The only other book of her's that was available at the library was "Spinners". When I picked up the booked and learned it was a retelling of Rumplestilskin, a fairy tale I have never really loved, I was prepared for a not-so-great book. Well, I was wrong. "Spinners", in my opinion, was pretty decent.

The writing in the beginning and middle was beautiful, but the last third of the book seemed strained to fit the original story. I surprisingly enjoyed the detailed descriptions of Saskia's beautiful yarn. I felt terribly bad for her when she was forced to marry the king after "she" spun straw into gold for three nights, threatened to be killed; and when she returned home to her father, only to find the house filled with straw, the father's desperate attempt to get rich. I also liked the friendship between Saskia and Dagmar.

"Spinners" is by all means a good read, but it just lacks something that makes me want to buy it and but on the bookshelf with my favorites.

Spinners is a terrific retelling of the story of Rumpelstiltskin! (It has a great cover, too.) Spinners adds onto the original fairy tale a bit, showing you the perspective of the title character, who starts out as a talented tailor, who's poor but at the height of his life. He goes through a lot and you really have sympathize him. This book didn't end the way I hoped, and I'm trying not to spoil the book for you - but I must say, this book's ending was VERY tragic and . . . well, disappointing! I mean, the tailor never got what he deserved! However, this book provokes emotion as it was probably meant to and it does a great job, too. I highly recommend this book to others (at least above the age of 12)!

Napoli and Tchen weave a beautiful and bitter-sweet tale that takes this fairy tale to a new level. Based on the age old story of Rumpelstiltskin, Spinners delves into the story behind the story. The Spinner is a tailor who loves a woman so desperatly that he would do anything for her, even spin straw into gold. When he promises her father to clothe his love in gold he has to make good on his word. But his ever faithful love marries the drunken old miller instead. But she is with the Spinner's child.
Fifteen years later, the spinner returns to his village and saves his daughter, who likewise has a gift for spinning, from the fate imposed upon her by the king.
Beautiful retelling of the classic fairy tale, poignant and moving. I was unused to the tense in which the story was written, but it soon became natural to read as if it were just happening. If you have ever read Napoli's other books, such as Zel you will love this one!

Fences,by August Wilson,is a great and strong play,which tries to teach it's audience about a poor African-American family that goes through a lot of changes while trying to achieve their dreams. In this play,Rose Maxson,a middle-aged woman who is a good mother and wife, tries to keep her family together,while dealing with Troy Maxson's faults and infidelity.She dedicated her life to Troy,but slowly everything changes everyone's life,especially Troy's surprise. I think one of the things that makes this play so dramatic is the way the people in the play lose trust in one another.It's really hard to forgive their faults. Even though they loved each other so much,one little mistake ruined it. I think this play was great.It talked about a lot of things that happen now in real life.Troy reminded me of my father,who is a hard-working and honest man.Rose relates a lot to my mother because she is very religious,a good mother,and also fears a future without my father.The lesson I learned was that you should never trust a person if you're not sure about their feelings towards you.Also,don't let problems get between your love ones.I enjoyed reading this two-act play.I learned a lot of important things about life.This is an intresting story.

"Fences", by August Wilson is a mixture of tradgedy and triumph. It shows how real life doesnt always go the way that you expect it to. In this play, cory the son of troy maxon has to get through many problems which are very common with teenagers in the sixities. His father Troy is too controlling of him in his opinion and troy thinks cory needs to take more responsibility. Along with that troy is having to deal with desires that could possibly ruin his family life as he knows it. What will troy do? Tell his wife about his secret or never tell anyone and live with his secret forever. I think that one good thing about this play is that it shows how real life isnt always as good as in the movies. It shows that you can get through a lot in life, no matter what. This play was better thatn i expected it to be. It was very realistic and anyone of any age could read and enjoy this book. I can relate to cory and how he wants to do many extra things other that school even though his father wants him to work and make money. I usually dont like to read books in school because they are boring but this book was actually interesting and kept me wanting to read on. It told you about society in the fifties with out boring you with facts.

"Fences", by august wilson is a mixture of tradgedy and triumph. It shows how real life doesnt always go the way that you expect it to. In this play, cory the son of troy maxon has to get through many problems which are very common with teenagers in the sixities. His father Troy is too controlling of him in his opinion and troy thinks cory needs to take more responsibility. Along with that troy is having to deal with desires that could possibly ruin his family life as he knows it. What will troy do? Tell his wife about his secret or never tell anyone and live with his secret forever. I think that one good thing about this play is that it shows how real life isnt always as good as in the movies. It shows that you can get through a lot in life, no matter what. This play was better thatn i expected it to be. It was very realistic and anyone of any age could read and enjoy this book. I can relate to cory and how he wants to do many extra things other that school even though his father wants him to work and make money. I usually dont like to read books in school because they are boring but this book was actually interesting and kept me wanting to read on. It told you about society in the fifties with out boring you with facts.

I read this book when I was fifteen, and I think it would make me sick if I were to read it now. But more about that later. The main character, Gail, is not portrayed as a saint but rather as a sexually active sixteen year old-this makes it hard for some people, I suppose. Secretly, whether we will admit it or not, it's harder for some of us to empathize with a sexually active character who, as the rapist points out, isn't even wearing a bra when he attacks her. Grr, darn that Richard Peck, exposing our prejudices!

Honestly, Gail isn't a very likable character. She's kind of selfish, kind of manipulative, kind of meanly sarcastic...I think that's why I liked her so much. She's real. When she starts getting threatening notes and phone calls, she doesn't know what to do, and so, as most people would, she doesn't do much of anything. At this point we're screaming at the book to try to get her to do something, because we know what's coming. But the greatest strength of this novel is that it makes us wonder what we would do in a similar situation.

The most frustrating thing about this book is that it seems to carry the message that there's nothing we CAN do. Gail tries to defend herself but fails. She tries to punish the man responsible, but fails. Maybe that's reality, but not only is it extremely frustrating, it's a BAD message to send to victims:Don't try to prosocute your attacker, the justice system is against you. I don't think that's necessarily the message that Mr. Peck was trying to get accross, but that's how I felt when reading the book. That's why I can't give this book more than three stars. It's good, the characters seem real, but it's hard to like any of them, and by the end you're pulling your hair out over the unfairness at all. Maybe I should give the book extra points for eliciting such a strong emotional response-I can see that I'm not alone, given the other reviews on this site. In that case, give it four stars. This book is compelling, and it's definately worth reading, but be forewarned about these messages before you read: the justice system is often unjust, it's hard to find people you can trust, and survival is a difficult and painful process.

The original copyright of the book is 1976 and that's the problem. It was written for the times. If a girl got raped, her reputation was put on trial. Was she asking for it? Did she deserve it in some way? She had to be prepared to be dragged through the mud in court. She had to deal with her attacker getting off scot free, facing him again in school. Almost 30 years later you want to scream at the cops who bully her, scream at the lawyer who discourages her from prosecuting, scream at anyone who wants to sweep it under the rug. No one should read this book after reading "A Long Way From Chicago" or "A Year Down Yonder" and expect the same lightness and warmth. This is a dark story. An ALA award winner I believe. A good read, but be prepared. Not for middle schoolers in my opinion.

I read this book when I was fifteen, and I think it would make me sick if I were to read it now. But more about that later. The main character, Gail, is not portrayed as a saint but rather as a sexually active sixteen year old-this makes it hard for some people, I suppose. Secretly, whether we will admit it or not, it's harder for some of us to empathize with a sexually active character who, as the rapist points out, isn't even wearing a bra when he attacks her. Grrr, darn that Richard Peck, exposing our prejudices!

Honestly, Gail isn't a very likable character. She's kind of selfish, kind of manipulative, kind of meanly sarcastic...I think that's why I liked her so much. She's real. When she starts getting threatening notes and phone calls, she doesn't know what to do, and so, as most people would, she doesn't do much of anything. At this point we're screaming at the book to try to get her to do something, because we know what's coming. But the greatest strength of this novel is that it makes us wonder what we would do in a similar situation.

The most frustrating thing about this book is that it seems to carry the message that there's nothing we CAN do. Gail tries to defend herself but fails. She tries to punish the man responsible, but fails. Maybe that's reality, but not only is it extremely frustrating, it's a BAD message to send to victims:Don't try to prosocute your attacker, the justice system is against you. I don't think that's necessarily the message that Mr. Peck was trying to get accross, but that's how I felt when reading the book. That's why I can't give this book more than four stars. I really think it deserves five stars. It's good, the characters seem real, but it's hard to like any of them, and by the end you're pulling your hair out over the unfairness at all. Maybe I should give the book extra points for eliciting such a strong emotional response-I can see that I'm not alone, given the other reviews on this site. In that case, give it five stars. This book is compelling, and it's definately worth reading, but be forewarned about these messages before you read: the justice system is often unjust, it's hard to find people you can trust, and survival is a difficult and painful process. Peck must be commended, however, for being so brutally honest.