George Knight relates a story in the prologue: There was an old British radio show that frequently had guests of all kinds. At one point they had a theologan on. The host asked him what 12 books of the Bible he would bring if he were stranded on a desert island. "Well, I certainly wouldn't bring Leviticus," was the theologan's reply. That is the case with many Christians. To them, many of the Old Testament books "just aren't important," but they ALL are still the word of God.

George Knight gives us a very readable and practical commentary on the book of Leviticus (a manuel for Israel's priests and a "Holiness Code"--moral commands--for the people). The book consists of a half-chapter (give or take) of Scripture followed by Knight's commentary. Knight often gives some very insightful commentary showing what this type of animal sacrifice shows about God's personality or explaining why the people could only have one type of crop in a given field.

Although Knight succeeds in making a normally dull book (especialy when compared with Genesis, Joshua, 2 Samuel, the Gospels, etc) seem exciting, there do exist some faults with the book. One chapter in Leviticus deals with rules agains homosexuality. Instead of coming right out and saying what he believes Leviticus says about the subject, Knight tip-toes and tap-dances so much, I'm still not really quite sure WHAT he believes about it. I'm not sure if he's delicately trying to say that God is wrong about gay folk or if he's just a little afraid to actually condemn homosexual practices.

There are other places in the commentary where Knight does a similar tap-dance routine, but overall, this is an extremely good commentary that really aided in my understanding of Leviticus.

This book provides an in-depth analysis of Leviticus with reflections on our times and our issues.

In many cases we read Genesis and Exodus then run right to the New Testament failing to understand Leviticus and are uncomfortable defending the Word of God as expressed in the images of a B.C. nomadic people; their rituals; and their sacrifices.

As you read each of these pages the images become clearer to us as the same images are seen in our world today and God's Word and its meaning becomes clearer.

Read this book and then move on through the Word of God without lingering doubts and know His Word truly holds the answers to our life.

Thank you George Knight for such an illuminating book.

This book has marvelous images of just some of the fine works that George Ohr created. The summaries of his life are correct to some extent but it failed to provide any deatails of his offspring or how they may have carried on the innate artist abilities, this is why I only give it four stars.

this man was a a head of his time. i have never seen anythig that has come out of the 1800's that looked any thing like this.The photography is great and the biography is good , but the pottery is the best i have ever seen he had great form and great glaze you could not ask any more from a potter

This is a remarkable look at the untamed American West of 1834-1837 through the eyes of a young naturalist. Despite its age, this account is quite readable. The smaller segments describing Townsend's visits to Hawaii, Tahiti and Chile are also enjoyable.

Since this is a diary, it does have some flat spots (not every day can be an adventure), but mostly Townsend fills his descriptions with details and color that bring his encounters alive. You can sense Townsend maturing as the journey goes on. One suggestion to the editors: If a new edition is produced, it would be nice to include a map of Townsend's travels, because in some places it's hard to tell where he is.

A tip to the reader: Skip the introduction, since it's mostly just a summary of what you'll be reading. It does, however, contain a description of what happened to Townsend after the book, so go back and read that once you finish.

hi everyone, please buy, read and cherish this book! you would not believe how much work went into this - I know because I'm the author's daughter. BUY BUY BUY! :) thanks

This book is excellent for teachers of theatre, or really for anyone who is interested in the inner workings of a playwright. Its only down-fall is that the playwrights themselves were sometimes less than forth-coming with answers we all want to know: HOW DOES THE PLAY GET ON THE PAGE??? However, it is very interesting in that we get into the heads of some very famous playwrights and shows us a personal side. I could barely put it down because I've read and taught these playwrights for years, but now have personal insight into their work and lives.

I bought this series of interviews in hopes of discovering more about these playwrights' points of view on writing. I was pleasantly startled to find that their stories were inspiring, as well. As a young playwright, I find the business of theatre rather disheartening. Egos are batted around much like cricket birdies, while fad and fashion dictate what is theatrically acceptable. These playwrights coped with the same obstacles, with great success. I found it interesting that each playwright had his/her own particular challenges to confront, and that one theme, throughout all the interviews, was constant: writing a play is akin to facing one's own soul, and a playwright has to confront the mirror dead-on and keep going.

A wonderful read.

Having read H.G. Wells' classics WAR OF THE WORLDS, THE INVISIBLE MAN, THE FIRST MEN IN THE MOON, THE TIME MACHINE, and THE ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU, I looked forward to reading what is often claimed to be his "best" work. TONO-BUNGAY is completely different than any of his Sci-Fi classics. TONO-BUNGAY is more of a study of class structure and class struggle in England during the late 1800s and early 1900s. The story follows the life of a young man, George, and his Uncle Edward. Edward invents an elixir called TONO-BUNGAY and hires his nephew George to help build the company. As the book goes George and Edward become quite wealthy. Throughout the book George makes numerous comments on his varying places on the social ladder. It seems that no matter how wealthy George becomes, he will never be accepted in certain circles because he is newly rich and not "old money." The story is well written and is generally easy to follow. I would, however, recomm! end the World's Classics edition of this book (published by Oxford U. Press and available from Amazon.Com) because there are some instances in which Wells makes comments about European literature, art, languages, colleges and phrases that may be of little meaning to the average reader, but for the six pages of end notes provided in the World's Classics edition. The World's Classics edition also claims to be the most accurate edition of the story, taking into account all of Wells' revisions of the story, many of which were made after the book was initially published in 1909 (TONO-BUNGAY was revised by Wells and re-released in 1925).

"Tono-Bungay" is an alleged tonic with dubious medical benefits; and the story is one of the brief fortunes of someone who manages to turn the worthless substance into a formidable fortune - for a while. By the time Wells wrote this novel he had already written books which might or might not be science fiction (witness "The War in the Air") and, all in all, "Ton-Bungay" probably isn't science fiction. But I should mention a substance called "quup" which is introduced towards the end of the book. (I'm not giving anything important away.) "Quup" is the first mention I know of of what we would now call radioactive waste, except that it's naturally occurring, and ... well, perhaps I should be discrete, but I can say that the scenes involving quup have a peculiar flavour which writers would find impossible to capture nowadays.

So you get an excellent double deal with this book: the best of Wells's social fiction of the 1910s, plus a dollop the fresh science fiction he wrote the previous century.

This book (and its second volume: Military Operations since 1871) are both required texts for my Military History class. Most students claim to only rapidly skim required reading for classes, but I've managed to read everything so far (if that tells you anything). As far as material is concerned, this text is both wide-ranging and thourough, describing the invention and development of military techniques as well as discussing the society and government of the time, and how all these factors influence eachother. Highlighted areas include the Thirty Years War and the development of limited war, and the progression though the Napoleonic Wars to almost complete total war during the War Between the States. This book does an excellent job in tying all these early battles together and showing the overall development of warfare. However, if you are interested in nitty-gritty facts on Waterloo or Gettysburg, find a book specific to that battle instead of the sweeping panoramic view this book provides.

This book is the result of the collaboration of a number of the best military historians in the US today, including Mark Grimsley, George Herring, John Lynn, and many others, skilfully tied together by the editors (who are also major contributors), Professor Ira Gruber of Rice University and Colonel Robert A. Doughty of West Point. The result is an outstanding survey of modern Western military history designed for undergraduate history courses, but easily accessible to the general reader as well. The prose is exceptionally clear and the ideas lucidly presented. These two volumes are definitely focussed on the operational level of the "military art" (i.e. on the planning and conduct of campaigns), with some treatment also of strategy, tactics, and technology, but very litte material on "war and society" subjects (i.e. how wars and military developments have affected society and vice-versa). This makes it especially useful for ROTC military history classes, but it is also a very good introduction to the "sharp end" of military history for scholars or students whose main interests lie in the effects of war, rather than its conduct.

The Folger Library series are your best Shakespeare source. They specialize in Shakespeares' greatest plays and are quality books that are perfect companion and translator to Shakespeare. It is loaded with page after page of translation from the Old English expressions that are no longer in use to our modern talk, and pictures as well as historic background information on th Elizabethan era and Shakespeares' life. Hamlet is without question Shakespeare's greatest tragedy, remaining in our theatrical culture to this very day. It has become a conversation piece for English professors, dramatists and screen actors (Mel Gibson tackled the role in 1991) and even psychologists, who claim that Hamlet had the Oedipal complex, especially when they read the scene in which Hamlet is in his mother's bedroom. What makes Hamlet so great ? Why does this old play still come alive when performed on the stage in the hands of the right actors ?

Shakespeare, believe it or not, was a people's person and knew about the human condition perhaps more than anyone in his day. Hamlet deals principally with obscession for revenge. Hamlet is a prince whose father has been murdered under the evil conspiracy from his uncle Claudius and even the support of his mother, Queen Gertrude. Depressed, wearing black all the time, and very much as solitary as any "Goth" would be in our day, Hamlet laments his situation, until his father's ghost appears and urges him to avenge his death. The mystery still remains, is this ghost real ? Is it, as many in Elizabetheans thought, a demon in disguise ? Or is it simply a figment of Hamlet's own emotions and desire for revenge. At any rate, Hamlet's father appears twice and Hamlet spends most of the play planning his revenge. His most striking line that reveals this consuming need is "The play's the thing, wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king!".

Pretending to be mad, he scorns even the love of the woman he genuinely loves, Ophelia, whose mind is shattered and heart is broken and who has an impressive mad scene. The deaths of Hamlet's friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, are also in Hamle'ts hands and a consequence of his revenge. The famous soliloquy in the play, is of course, "To be or not to be", taken on by such great actors as Lawrence Olivier and Orson Welles. Hamlet muses on the brevity of life and the suffering which can only cease through death, as he holds a skull and is evidently suicidal. Finally, the last scenes are the most dramatic. Hamlet duels with Laertes, Ophelia's brother, and with Claudius himself. The deaths of the main cast, including the Queen, goes to show how tragic the human desire for greed and revenge is.

This is Shakespeare's finest tragedy, and quality drama, best seen in a live stage performance, but that also works as a film. As for this book, as I said before, this is the Hamlet to have. You will become more acquianted with Hamlet and Shakespeare even more than taking a year's course with a teacher. This book itself is the teacher.

A tragedy by William Shakespeare, written around 1599-1601. Before the play opens, the king of Denmark has been murdered by his brother, Claudius, who has taken the throne and married the queen, Gertrude. The ghost of the dead king visits his son, Prince Hamlet, and urges him to avenge the murder. Hamlet, tormented by this revelation, appears to be mad and cruelly rejects Ophelia whom he loved. Using a troupe of visiting players to act out his father's death, the prince prompts Claudius to expose his own guilt. Hamlet then kills Ophelia's father Polonius in mistake for Claudius, and Claudius tries but fails to have Hamlet killed. Ophelia drowns herself in grief, and her brother Laertes fights a duel with Hamlet.

Hamlet's dilemma is often seen as typical of those whose thoughtful nature prevents quick and decisive action.

Hamlet contains several fine examples of soliloquy, such as " To be or not to be" and Hamlet's earlier speech lamenting his mother's hasty remarriage and Claudius' reign which opens "O! that this too too solid flesh would melt". Much quoted lined "Neither a borrower nor a lender be", "Something is rotten in the stste of Denmark", "Brevity is the soul of wit", "To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;" The lady doth protest too much, methinks," and "Alas, poor Yorick". Arguably Shakespeare's finest play and one that can be read again and again.

If you could read only one thing in your lifetime Hamlet should be that one thing. It is Shakespeare's best work by far, and within its pages is more meaning than you could find within the pages of an entire library full of books, or plays as the case may be. A mere review, a couple words, cannot do Hamlet justice. At times I realize that the language of Shakespeare can be difficult that is why I recommend the Folger version because it helps to make the images expressed by Shakespeare's characters clear to the reader, and allows them to get their own deep personal meaning from Hamlet, Shakespeare's greatest work, with out being bogged down in trying to decipher and interpret his antiquarian English. Don't just listen to what I say, or read what I write, read the play on your own outside the cumbersome restraints of a classroom and see for yourself what I mean.

Julie of the Wolves is about a thirteen-year-old Eskimo girl named Miyax who gets lost on the Alaskan Tundra. She was running away from her dire husband, Daniel, and trying to get to Point Hope. The book is divided into three sections: Amaroq, the wolf, Miyax, the girl, and Kapugen, the hunter.
In the first section, instead of a human taking care of animals, the wolves are taking care of Miyax. When she is starving on the Tundra, the leader of the pack, Amaroq, slowly accepts her as one of the wolves and treats her as such by feeding her, and by keeping her company.
The second section talks about Miyax's father, Kapugen, presumed dead in the beginning. He raised her to be an old-fashioned Eskimo instead of a contemporary one.
Finally in the third section, hunters in an airplane shoot down the wolf Amaroq for no reason. Hunters usually kill wolves for their ears but the hunters in this case killed him for fun. After she saves Kapu, another wolf, she travels to Point Hope, only to find her father alive. He is no longer an old fashioned Eskimo, but has married a white woman, owns an airplane, and flies hunters. Miyax almost runs away again, but then realizes that the day of the Eskimo is gone and "...points her toes toward Kapugen."
I think that everybody changes over time, and the old ways can't always be kept. Miyax successfully became an old fashioned Eskimo, but at the end of her journey she had to become Julie of the town.

...By Wang

...Jean ... She got the idea for this book after she saw a girl walking alone in the tundra to visit a faraway friend. Her other inspiration was a regal alpha male wolf in the Denali National Park. ...

The story begins in the freezing artic winter. Miyax, a thirteen-year-old Eskimo girl, is alone on the tundra-covered North Slope of Alaska. She has spent several days without much nourishment. Now she has turned to a pack of wolves. She is hoping to learn to communicate with them. Then, hopefully, the pack will give her food from their hunt. So far, her attempts have been hopeless. But, if her father, Kapugen had once done it, so could she.

Miyax had been watching the pack for days. She was Eskimo. Eskimos, like other Native Americans, had great respect for nature. Although Miyax sometimes believed the old Eskimo traditions were a little silly, she did love nature. ... The alpha male, or leader of the pack, was Amaroq, the Eskimo word for wolf. His mate was the beautiful Silver. Amaroq's friend was Nails. ...There was also another who didn't stick with the rest of the pack as much: Jello. He was small and quite wiggly.

Reading Julie of the Wolves was like going on an epic adventure through the artic tundra. On a scale of one to ten, I'd give this book an eleven. It's not at all surprising that Jean Craighead George won a Newbery Medal for this book. I liked it when Miyax communicated to the wolves. ... I recommend that anyone who enjoys nature read Julie of the Wolves!

Miyax's Great Adventure
Miyax, the main character, is thirteen years old and has to go and live with her aunt. She has an unexpected marriage to a boy named Daniel. She does not like her husband, Daniel. She decides to run away from her aunt and Daniel. She gets welcomed into a pack of wolves. Here she gets food and names the wolves. Miyax named the leader of the pack Amraque. She tries to survive in the Alaskan Wilderness with the wolves. Will Miyax survive in the Alaskan Wilderness? I like this book very much, because it is realistic fiction. Also because the climax is very exciting. If you read this book I am sure you will learn something. I learned that the wolves eat big chunks of meat and regurgitate the food for their pups. There is also a sequel to this book. It is called Julie Sky. If you read this book, I am sure you will like it.

This is the central question explored by Conrad in Lord Jim. Jim is ultimately a character who inspires our sympathy due to his inability to find reconcilliation for his one tragic moment of weakness. In him we find a person of tremendous potential that remains unrealized as the tragic circumstances of his abandoning his post aboard the Patna continually haunt him and the associated guilt drives him to isolation.
Conrad successfully explores the concepts of bravery, cowardice,guilt and the alternative destinies that an individual may be driven to by these qualities.
The narrative can be a bit confusing at times as Marlowe relates the tale by recalling his encounters with Jim. The book reminded very much of Somerset Maugham's THE RAZOR"S EDGE" in style. However I believe that Maugham did a much better job of incorporating the narrator into the flow of the story. Overall LORD JIM is a wonderful classic novel that I highly recommend.

After reading this book (along with several other of Conrad's books) I am under the impression that Joseph Conrad may very well be my favorite author. Here is another masterpiece, a deeply incisive study of character of the motivation and the ultimate failure of all high-minded ideals. Granted my own personal world view falls directly in line with this realization and therefore prejudices me towards anything the man might write, but, when considering such a lofty title as 'favorite author' one must regard other aspects of the novelist's creation. As with the others, Conrad wins by the power of his stories.

Lord Jim is my least favorite of the the four books I have read by Conrad. The story is rather scattered: a righteous young man does something wrong that he holds himself far too accountable for and the public shame the action brought him exaggerates the reality of his failure and makes him believe the rumors swirling around about his so-called cowardice. He spends the remainder of his life trying to reclaim his self-regard, mostly exaggerating his own importance in matters he hardly understands. His goal is to liberate the primitive people of the jungle paradise he inadvertantly finds himself in (due to an effort to escape every particle of the world he once inhabited) and his once high-minded ideals and regard for himself lead him to allow those people to consider him almost a God.

Jim likes being a God and considers himself a just and fair one. He treats everyone equally and gives to his people the knowledge of modern science and medicine as well as the everyday archetecture and understanding of trade that those primitive folks would otherwise be years from comprehending.

Of course everything ends in failure and misery and of course Jim's restored name will be returned to its demonic status, but the whole point of the novel seems to me that one can not escape their past. Jim, for all his courage in the line of fire has tried to avoid all memory of the once shameful act of his former life and by doing so becomes destined to repeat his mistakes.

Lord Jim is far more expansive than the story it sets out to tell, ultimately giving a warning on the nature of history and general humanity that only a writer of Conrad's statue could hope to help us understand.

If there is a flaw it is not one to be taken literally. Conrad was a master of structural experimentation and with Lord Jim he starts with a standard third person narrative to relate the background and personalities of his characters and then somehow merges this into a second person narrative of a man, years from the events he is relating, telling of the legend of Jim. It is a brilliant innovation that starts off a little awkward and might lead to confusion in spots as the story verges into its most important parts under the uncertain guidence of a narrator who, for all his insight into others, seems unwilling to relate his personal relevence to the story he is relating.

Nevertheless (with a heartfelt refrain), one of the best books I have ever read.

This is the fifth book I have read by Conrad, and through these readings I have come to deeply appreciate his literary power and the perfection of his stories. Conrad has the skill to border about several similar subjects, without repeating himself. "Lord Jim" is truly a Shakespearean tragedy, mainly because of the Shakespearean nature of the main character. Jim is a young naval officer with high hopes of heroism and moral superiority, but when he faces his first test of courage, he miserably fails. While 800 Muslim pilgrims are asleep aboard the ship "Patna", Jim discovers that the boat is about to sink. There are not sufficient lifeboats for everybody. Should he wake them up or not? He gets paralyzed with fear and then sudenly jumps into a boat being set up by the rest of the officers. He is taken to trial and disposessed of his working licence.

Ashamed and humiliated, Jim dedicates the rest of his life to two things: escape the memory of that fateful night, and redeem himself. This agonizing quest to recover his dignity in front of his own eyes leads him to hide in a very remote point in the Malayan peninsula, where he will become the hero, the strong man, the wise protector of underdeveloped, humble and ignorant people. Jim finds not only the love of his people, but also the love of a woman who admires him and fears the day when he might leave for good. The narrator, Captain Marlow (the same of "Heart of Darkness") talks to Jim for the last time in his remote refuge, and then Jim tells him that he has redeemed himself by becoming the people's protector. Oh, but these things are never easy and Jim will face again the specter of failure.

Conrad has achieved a great thing by transforming the "novel of adventures" into the setting for profound and interesting reflections on the moral stature of Man, on courage, guilt, responsibility, and redemption.

Just as in "Heart of Darkness" the question is what kinds of beings we are stripped of cultural, moral and religious conventions; just as in "Nostromo" the trustworthiness of a supposedly honest man is tested by temptation, in "Lord Jim" the central subject is dignity and redemption after failure.

A great book by one of the best writers.

I listened to this book on audio and maybe that made it harder to follow than actually reading it, but I was kind of left behind several times. The story takes place mainly in a radio station in 1942, where our main character, Jack Dulaney, is trying to help his love interest, Holly O'Hara/Carnahan, discover what has happened to her father. I guess the main plot was clear, but when the story veered off into Nazis and Irish thugs and the like, I couldn't stay with it. To tell the truth, I didn't really care that much who had killed her father, as he was never a character that was developed enough to make me care. Along with his death are those of Jack's friend, Marty, and another radio employee's husband. Too many people were brought into the story without explanation which made for a pretty blah mystery. I stuck it out until the end, not so much because I cared about the ending, but just to see if I could do it. I suppose this would have more meaning to someone who lived in this time period and could remember the days when radio was the main form of entertainment, but it didn't appeal much to me.

I Just Finished reading John Dunning new novel "Two O'Clock Eastern WarTime". With All apologies to those have read it, I found it must read for any Old Time radio buff. The novel is set in 1942, and tells the tale of a Drifter named Jack Dulaney who looking for a lost love becomes involved in a local New Jersey radio station struggling to survive in WWII America. Dulaney while on the trail of the killer since leaving California becomes intangled in workings of the N.J Radio station and becomes its chief scriptwriter. The bulk of the book concerns Dulaney involvement in the Radio station attempts to leave the "Network" and produce its own original programming including a serial, controversial antiwar shows, patrioic war bond specials, and show meant to be "Destination Freedom" that goes by another name in the novel. While Dulaney brecomes involved in the Radio station he learns to write, direct and eventual produce his own shows while subtly solving the dark mystery that lies in the background.

I had one reservation that I found with the book was the reading of 90's Moral and Political sensibilities into 1940s characters a bit troubling. Having said that I still found well worth the read. Mr. Dunning vividly brings the setting to life. You can almost feel youself there on the soundstage the actors take the microphone or the band on stage finishes a tune for the war bond show. One particular aspect the book brings to life is process of script writing a radio show or closet thing I am likely to experience since it all happened before my time. One thing that particular interest to me as Old Time Radio fan was in trying to guess who he based each character on assuming he did. One final thought I noticed was a small plot device in the book bore a striking resemblance to an 1946 Radio episode of the show :THE WHISTLER. Although a Non-OTR buff would hardly know this. I think the book would be of less interest to non-otr fans however because the setting: the workings of radio station in 1942 wartime America plays a dominant part of the novel to the point that the ending while suspenseful is of lesser importance to the reader.

Despite any Reservations this book is a MUST for any OTR fan.

Set in 1942 on the Jersey shore,it's about spys and OTR and a very special romance. I probably liked this especially well because I could visulize the whole thing, having spent my youth right about where the story unfolds. I've worked in radio and John imbued the story with the "feeling" of a studio at the hight of the golden age. In fact I felt a lot of emotion while reading portions of it. Unlike another reviewer, I found the story had plenty of twists and turns and I enjoyed it to the end. Like Dunning, I was born in 1942, and that to lent a special quality to the book. He researched that era and nailed as far as I can tell.