John Davidson Books

Goes into a great overall review where the documentation falls short. It provided some insightful examples that helped us address a problem we had for weeks. Only shortfall, even though it has a lengthy example on dynamic querying, it needs more documentation on the true capabilities of the pl/sql OWA_UTIL functions/procedures.

As an introductory book its fine but as a `Most Complete' you want it to expand beyond basic examples into e.g. interaction between the cartridge types, practical implementation advice etc.

I'd have used the money back guarantee if there was one as I expected a bit more from it.

This book does a good job of providing an overview of the architecture surrounding OAS 3.0, but certainly does not hold to its claim as "The Most Complete Reference." Its biggest shortfall is its lack of detail concerning Inter-Cartridge Exchange (ICX). It mentions this topic at least a few times, and explains the premise behind ICX, but doesn't provide any examples of how ICX is accomplished from a PL/SQL cartridge to a C cartridge, for example. A good book for people who are just learning about OAS and want an introduction and then some.

The text provides more of a basic over view of Ows 3.0 and it's capabilites. It dosen't fully in my opinion get to the meat of the server. it's strength's and weakness.

Does a reasonable job of covering Oracle Web Application Server 3.0, but the Oracle Press book is better.

Had there been no Shakespeare, John Ford's play "'Tis Pity She's a Whore" would never have been written--but Shakespeare's tremendous example not only provided part of context of this play, but also obscures it. "'Tis Pity" is not as good as Shakespeare's very best works (the great tragedies and romances). Ford struggles to match Shakespeare's second-best works (e.g., the great comedies such as "As You Like It").

But judging Ford in comparison with Shakespeare is unfair. Perhaps a few score of writers really match Shakespeare: Homer, Sappho, Ovid, Virgil, perhaps Dante. I wouldn't give Shakespeare a five-star rating and give, say, Pope, Keats, or Austen a four-star rating. Nor would I give Ford a three-star rating next to Shakespeare's five-star and Keats' and Austen's four-star ratings.

In the bell curve of literature, Shakespeare and Homer (in my opinion) occupy the vanishingly small right side of the curve. Very few writers match Ford's achievement in "'Tis Pity." The play is powerful, cleanly plotted, and brilliantly written. In particular, Ford does a great job in creating sympathy for all of his major characters, and in particular for the incestuous lovers at the heart of the play. The play suffers only by comparison with Shakespeare and perhaps a handful of other great dramatists.

More important, the New Mermaids edition is very useful. The introduction is thoughtful and thorough; the page layout is clear (especially important with drama); and the footnotes are generally useful. The editor, Wiggins, sometimes elucidates matters that are perfectly clear--but I would rather the editor take that approach than leave me in the dark.

In short, serious students of literature will want to read this play, and the New Mermaids edition provides a well-annotated text using modern English spelling.

Incest and dirty double hearted deeds that led all to this tragedy!
In cattle and horses siblings are breed that good genes double and bad ones die out.
In humans it engenders a madness of the superego
that leads to downfall and disgrace for all.
" Get thee to a nunnery " is the other side of "Tis Pity She's A Whore".
There is no wrong save "they" said it were so.
For men are but animals and their empty morals
all useless inventions?
We would better in these latter days trust
to DNA science than outmoded conventions.

This is a highly emotional and well-written work that explores a very taboo subject matter. The play revolves a case of forbidden love, in this case, Giovanni's incestuous love for his sister Annabella. It's pretty easy to figure out after the first few pages that the play will have a tragic ending, but there are several major surprises that happen along the way, and the final scene is unbelievably violent. I'd love the chance to stage a production of "Tis Pity" one of these days...from a directorial standpoint, the script is filled with many interesting possibilities.

This play is an excellent example of incest in the Renaissance. It's also fairly short and very readable. Bergetto is an interesting character and provides much needed comic relief in this play which is ultimately quite tragic. The title is misleading in many ways, but female sexuality is problematic throughout.

I chose to read this play because firstly, Anthony Burgess mentioned it in his book "English Literature" (1857) and secondly, because it was a short play. Or maybe even thirdly - the central theme [incest] it deals with is treated in an entirely different manner from other literary works. The nature of the incest is frank and horrifying. The intensity of the unlawful relationship is compromised by the coarsening of Giovanni's love for Annabella; their ethereal relationship gradually loses its innocence in the course of the play, culminating in Annabella's pregnancy and finally her death in Giovanni's hands.

While we certainly cannot put Ford in the ranks of Shakespeare, he deserves credit for a play whose themes of sexual jealousy, revenge, violence and incent intertwine in a most heartrending way.

Everything you need to know about Shakespeare, his life and times is put forth in this first-rate juvenile biography. Since little is known about Will Shakespeare, why waste time reading a lot of speculation? It is a marvel how Celeste Davidson Mannis creates many interesting asides in so short a space, including words and phrases that were coined by the Bard, an explanation of blank verse, what school was like, the politics of the time, big city London, and how the Globe Theatre came about. An abundance of B&W illustrations helps the reluctant reader along, but this is a worthy effort for any age reader who wants to know all there is to know about Shakespeare in a nutshell. Includes Bibliography, a timeline of Shakespeare's life, and a timeline of the world matching Shakespeare's dates.

I liked Who Was William Shakespeare? and it was alright, so i recommend buying Who Was William Shakespeare? and again, it's a good one!

Reviewed by Gabriel Peralta (age 9) for Reader Views (5/08)

I chose this book because I didn't know about William Shakespeare. After reading it, I learned he was an actor, and he wrote famous plays that are still read by people today. The book tells you about his life. You learn everything about him. For example, I learned the he moved to London because he wanted to be an actor. He worked hard and made a lot of money. I think these books are great if you want to learn about a famous person. I think kids my age will enjoy "Who Was William Shakespeare?"

I thought this book was very boring and very dry. This book was chosen by my history professor for my History of American Foreign Relations class so I had no choice in reading this book. Some parts were very interesting, and it held my attention for a while, but then the authors would go back to the dry and monontonous tone that put me to sleep. If you're a history buff, you might enjoy this book. If not, I don't suggest you buying it.

Honestly, if you buy a book entitled "From Isolation to War" in the AMERICAN HISTORY SERIES, you're bound to be disappointed if you're A) Not a history buff or B) a complete idiot. Hopefully, having at least found this book listed on Amazon, you are neither. I have worked with Professor Doenecke, and used his book as a textbook in two classes. It is well-written, thoroughly-researched, dryly humorous at points, and extremely incisive. A true pleasure to read, especially if you are aware that history is a force in our lives, and will continue to be so forevermore.

It is undeniable that J.M. Synge was a very important Irish playwright of the early 20th century. These plays, especially, "Playboy of the Western World," are pivotal to Irish literature, and now, Irish culture. Any serious student of British drama, or actor should read both of these plays.

On the other hand, it may not be an ideal idea for someone that does not fall into one of those two catagories. The dialectic style is very thick, and at times difficult to understand. "Playboy," an important (and early) Irish peasant drama is beautifully writen, but for a casual reader it would probably come off as a slow read that is not all that entertaining.

Important work from cultural and recent historical perspectives, but these plays are very dated and, as I mentioned, not the most entertaining read.

First off, I write in favor of the works of Synge; yet, I find it unfortunate that Amazon is not offering a better version than the Dover Thrift. Synge's symbolism will pull you in and embrace you and warm out to his style. John Millington Synge was a lover of words and dialect, he even says that he only used words that he heard being used in Ireland. Both of these plays are well written and full of symbolism. For the serious love of Irish Literature or drama, J.M. Synge is a must. Read on...

It has been almost thirty years now (December 9, 1977) since a single ten-second snippet of NBA history forever changed the way that the game of professional basketball is played. On that evening in Los Angeles, Houston Rockets star Rudy Tomjanovich was almost killed by a single punch thrown by Kermit Washington of the Los Angeles Lakers. In the immediate aftermath of the incident, no one realized the tremendous impact that Tomjanovich's injury would have, not only on the lives of the two men directly involved, but on the league itself. John Feinstein's The Punch explains how the paths of Rudy Tomjanovich and Kermit Washington crossed that night in what was really more an accident than a fight and how they have become forever linked in the minds of basketball fans, something about which neither man is happy.

In one very important sense, the NBA of the 1970s resembled the game of hockey as it is played in the NHL. NBA teams depended on superstars to score points and to convince people to buy tickets. Team owners and managers realized that those superstars needed to be protected because their injury or ejection would make or break a team's whole season. For that reason, NBA teams almost always had someone on the floor to serve as the team's enforcer, someone who would make sure that their superstar was not injured in a fight, someone who would often fight the superstar's fight in his place, in fact. Kermit Washington, a fine player in his own right, also served as enforcer for the Los Angeles Lakers and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

Washington found himself coming to Abdul-Jabbar's rescue again on that fateful night, something he was used to doing on a regular basis for the hot tempered Abdul-Jabbar. As the players were running from one end of the basketball court to the other, Washington noticed that Abdul-Jabbar was becoming frustrated with the pushing and shoving he was receiving under the basket at the hands of Houston's Kevin Kunnert so he stayed close to the two men rather than running to the other end of the floor. Tomjanovich, Houston's team captain, noticed from his end of the court that his teammate was being manhandled by two Lakers and rushed in to break up the fight. As he approached Washington from behind, with his hands down, Washington turned suddenly and threw a single punch at Tomjanovich. The combination of Washington's strength, the speed at which Tomjanovich was approaching Washington's fist, and the exact location of the punch left Tomjanovich on the floor in a huge pool of blood.

Tomjanovich, who doctors say was lucky to survive the kind of punch that dislodged his skull, did not play again that season. Washington was suspended without pay for sixty days and his career was never really the same again. NBA rules governing player fights grew out of what happened that night because it made league officials aware of the great danger of letting men the size of professional basketball players take swings at each other. The league tightened up to such an extent that even players on the periphery of a fight were subject to fines and suspensions, especially those coming off the bench to involve themselves.

Just as importantly, the lives of Kermit Washington and Rudy Tomjanovich would never be the same. No matter what either player ever achieved on or off the court, each would always be remembered first for "the punch." Each of the men played for several more seasons, and Tomjanovich even coached the Houston Rockets to two NBA championships in the nineties, but both of them are still haunted by what happened during ten seconds of one of the thousands of basketball games they played during their lives.

John Feinstein was able to get both men, their families, and many of the players and coaches who were on the floor that night to share their memories. Rudy Tomjanovich, try as he might, cannot get over the feeling that everyone he meets thinks of him as the player "who got nailed." Kermit Washington has spent his life trying to convince people that he is not a thug who almost killed someone with a sucker punch in a fit of anger.

Feinstein gives equal time to both men, exploring their childhoods, their days as amateur basketball stars, and their professional careers. He does not take sides or make excuses for what happened that night. Instead, he lets both men tell their versions of what happened and how that has affected their lives ever since. Strangely enough, it is Kermit Washington who seems to be having the hardest time dealing with the whole thing. Washington seems to have become somewhat paranoid about what he did and still blames the hit his reputation took that night for everything bad that has happened to him since then. As pointed out by John Lucas, an ex-player who made plenty mistakes of his own, Washington needs to finally just say, "I'm sorry. I screwed up." He will never find the closure that Tomjanovich seems to have found until he stops saying, "I'm sorry, but..."

Feinstein is a fine writer but you wouldn't know it from this. This really should have been a retrospective article in Sports Illustrated, not a full-sized book. I often thought there were printing errors in my copy because I was reading similar passages over and over. But no, I suppose Feinstein needed to get a decent sized book so he did what he had to do.

But at least I have a better overall view of Kermit Washington. He's a really great guy in many ways, very charitable and caring. The problem is he's handled just about everything relating to "the punch" poorly. He blames another player, tells Rudy how much he's suffered in a rare meeting, sues the NBA, etc. etc. I think it was John Lucas who advised him to take responsibility and move on, not say "I'm sorry, but...". Unfortunately, Washington hasn't taken this advice. I hope someday he does, because there's no winning when you look for excuses and scapegoats in something horrific you've done.

"The Punch" was an important event in the history of basketball. The author, John Feinstein did an okay job writing this book, but he kind of lost my interest after he started to repeat statements. "The Punch" is worth reading, because it told the event that changed the sport forever. If you are interested in basketball I recommend reading this book.

Everyone has a moment in their live's that has significant consequences. A time where everything changes, often as the result of a split-second or rash action. Kermit Washington, then of the Los Angeles Lakers, and Rudy Tomjanovich, of the Houston Rockets, on one night in 1977 in the midst of an NBA Game had such a moment. In an instant, Tomjanovich was almost killed by a punch which had connected with extreme force and velocity, and Kermit Washington was foreever defined by that aberrant act of violence.

Feinstein writes well and describes a fascinating world of professional athletics in the 1970's. He describes each of the protagonists' lives and the perspectives and effects of the incident to all whom it affected. Some great characters of sport past are here: Pete Newell, Red Auerbach, Bill Walton, Rick Barry, Chick Hearn, Larry O'Brien, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, etc. The writing is smooth and entertaining and keeps you from turning away.

There are some problems with the book, however. Editing is poor. Episodes recounted in one chapter are repeated in another. More importantly, Feinstein tries so hard to be objective that he distances himself from the reader. One cannot read this book and not come to the unmistakably conclusion that the reason why the event still affects Kermit Washington is because Washington has never come to grips with his own conduct.

The book relates how never really apologized or took accountability and that his failure to do so, when contrasted with Tomjanovich's ability to overcome in life and basketball, turns him into a self-inflicted victim. Now, Feinstein implies such and uses the words of others to reach this conclusion, but it would've been nice if he would break free from the sympathetic shoulder and challenge some of Washington's self-serving statements. This lack of journalistic integrity is particularly distressing in light of the clear implication that Washington, in an attempt to avoid personal responsibility, has dragged the reputation of another player and his family (Kevin Kunnert) through the mud. Inasmuch as Feinstein wants you to feel for Washington, this book fails to conform to the facts.

Still, an entertaining read and a fascinating look at sport in a different time and different place.

The punch. This was a horrible sports moment which affected so many lives. I still get shivers when I think of that event. As a teenager, it changed some of my views on sports, life and the two individuals involved. Feinstein had the incredible challenge of revisiting this event with the Rudy and Kermit and with the reader.
Feinstein delicately, but straightforwardly, tackles this subject, bringing out a wide range of emotions from himself, the particpants, the onlookers and the reader. He succeeds in showing that both men are truly victims of this unfortunate event. Rudy T is not the hero, nor Kermit the villian, although each will begrudgingly play that role on and off for years.
For the first time ever, the incident is studied in painstaking detail. It is poked and probed from many angles. For the first time ever, Kermit and Rudy both have a say about the event. Hopefully, this experience will help both men help. I know this book certainly opened my eyes to the men and the challenges both faced in the aftermath.

Mr. Davidson has written an excellent biography of astronomer Carl Sagan with this one. I think the book was written with a fine balance of view on the man. Davidson obviously did his homework. The book sufficiently covers Sagan's professional and personal life, without pulling any punches. In this book, I think most will also see the slow metamorphosis of a man primarily interested in science, becoming more and more interested in self-promotion. But don't get the idea is a Carl Sagan-bash. It is nothing of the kind, just admirably frank.

I grew up with Carl Sagan. An avid watcher of his COSMOS program when it aired in 1980, I like to credit Carl with turning me on to the wonders of science and, especially, the wonders of space exploration. Prior to seeing COSMOS I thought outer space was just a playground for X-Wing fighters, Colonial warriors, and the Starship Enterprise. Carl made space into a very real place, more fascinating than my young mind had ever thought possible, and COSMOS similarly impressed upon me the value of science as, to borrow the sub-title from one of Carl's best-known volumes, a candle in the darkness.

Many years later, shortly after I got married, my wife found the entire COSMOS series on VHS tape at a local library. I eagerly re-screened the entire series with adult eyes, and was reminded again of how fantastic the series was, what a great science promoter Carl could be, and I suppose the old child-like hero worship resurfaced with new energy. Carl then died tragically not longer after I re-screened COSMOS, and in a moment of telegraphed fan grief, I set up a web memorial to the man which I called the Carl Sagan Electronic Monument.

On that web site I extolled the virtues of the Great Popularizer. I praised his wisdom, his brilliance, his prowess as both husband and father, and generally set the man up on a pedestal of enormous height. For a few years I communicated with other Sagan fans, and even received one or two touching e-mails from Ann Druyan, thanking me for the CSEM and thanking me for being part of the enormous outpouring of support and love which centered around Carl following his passing.

Knowing my affinity for Sagan, my wife bought me "Demon Haunted World" and an audiobook, read by Sagan, of "Pale Blue Dot". I loved these as I loved COSMOS, and it seemed nothing could stem the hero worship.

Then, my wife bought me "Carl Sagan: A life", and the carefully constructed illusion slowly came apart.

I'd always known that certain people had a gripe against Sagan. I'd always chalked it up to petty jealousy against a truly great man. But as I turned the pages of this book, and the REALITY of Carl Edward Sagan began to hit home, I realized that in my rush to embrace Sagan as an idol, I'd completely fooled myself.

Meticulously researched, this book is an eye-opener for any Sagan fan. I've seen a lot of the one star comments, declaring that this is a book for "Sagan haters", which I think is unfair. If anything, this book exposes Sagan for who he really was, not who we wished him to be. I think all Sagan fans owe it to themselves to read this book, and then decide, as I did, which they loved more: Sagan as a PERSON, or Sagan as a vehicle for opening the wonders of space and science to the average man?

My conclusion, upon finishing this volume, is that I was not a fan of Sagan the man. Sagan seemed a poor husband, at least until the advent of Ann Druyan, and even then it seems clear he was already involved with Druyan prior to the dissolution of his relationship with his second wife. Moreover, Sagan was not a particularly good father to his first children, again only cleaning up his act for the Druyan years.

I have always believed that no amount of professional success can make up for failure in the home. I am glad that Sagan seems to have reformed by the time Druyan came on the scene, and that his youngest children seem to have enjoyed at least a competent dad. But what of the first two marriages, and the children that came of them? What of the abuse that he apparently doled out to his first wife? These things significantly mar the brilliant image of Sagan, and left me feeling as if I'd seriously deluded myself.

Moreover, Sagan the professional was also not without faults. For much of his life Carl seems to have been an enormously vainglorious and pompous fellow, essentially ruining his relationship with COSMOS producer Adrian Malone, so much so that the men were not on speaking terms by the time COSMOS earned its Emmy and Peabody Awards. Carl also developed a reputation as a scientific dilettente, precocious and opinionated and eager to claim mastery over various scientific subjects without actually contributing much bona fide advancement in those same fields. Many scientists came to resent Sagan as being too much of a self-promoter and not enough of a researcher, and as Sagan's public popularity began to soar, so did the grumbling by some in the scientific community who felt that Sagan was getting credit for their effort.

When I came back to my Sagan memorial web site, after reading this book, I realized I couldn't keep the web site up in good faith anymore. I slowly pruned the site down until it was just a placeholder, and then I shut it down altogether not longer after that.

Having said all this, I must emphasize that "Carl Sagan: A Life" is not a one-sided bash-session. There is much good said about Sagan, especially in regard to his role as popularizer, and in regard to his struggle with health problems, including a throat condition I had not previously known about, and his long decay due to myelodysplasia. His work in debunking UFOlogy and stressing skepticism (alongside other skeptics like James Randi) is to his credit, as are his forays into environmentalism and combating the threat of nuclear holocaust. The Planetary Society continues as one of the most energetic public bodies lobbying for continued space exploration, and there is no doubt that Sagan's legacy as a spark which has fired the efforts and imaginations of millions around the world, is secure.

I still own a DVD set of COSMOS and enjoy watching the series from time to time. As a character on the screen, Sagan is engaging, witty, brilliant, and engrossing, and COSMOS still stands, in my mind, as one of the greatest television science series of all time. I still keep the copy of "Demon Haunted World" and have the "Pale Blue Dot" tapes, because there is great thought and wisdom in these volumes, and they are to Sagan's eternal credit.

But Sagan the person has been permanently removed from his pedestal. In hindsight, I should have never placed him up there to begin with.

In COSMOS, Sagan lauds German astronomer Johannes Kepler for having the courage to face the reality of celestial planetary motion, rather than cling to his beloved illusion of the nested geometric solids. In the same spirit I would encourage all Sagan fans to cast aside any illusions they may have regarding Carl Sagan the man, and read this book, and know the faults and flaws and shortcomings of the man we all learned to admire and idolize as children.

You will be surprised. You will be dissapointed. But you will know the truth.

Five stars for this book. Absolutely. Thanks to Keay Davidson for having the literary courage to delve into Sagan's life, and not just offer up a superficial pean.

This "biography" is one, long malicious attack upon Carl Sagan.

Keay Davidson obviously detests Sagan - so much so that I don't know why he would wrire a book about someone he hates so much.

Only someone who hates Sagan could enjoy this book - but anyone who hates Sagan wouldn't be buying/reading a biography about him anyway.

This book has no real audience. I would rate it ZERO stars if I were able.

If you like anything Carl did, please look elsewhere for a biography and do not waste a penny or a second on this unfathomably putrid piece of attack-journalism.

By his enemies, detractors, and those envious of him, Carl Sagan has been called a "bozo", a "psuedoscientist", an "idiot", a "moron", and many other names that need not be repeated here. Those who like him though do so unabashedly, and in rare instances have had their scientific careers stymied because of their admitted admiration of him. It is fair to say, and an in-depth statistical study may support this, that the scientific community is automatically dismissive of public figures and the general public, and get angry when anyone within their midst attempts to explain things to people in these two classes. It is almost as though the attempt to explain difficult scientific ideas and concepts to the general public constitutes almost a criminal act, to be punished by banishment from professional societies and academia. The reason for this anger is unknown, and does not seem to serve any useful or constructive purpose either within the scientific community or outside of it.

Although the author is not a practicing scientist, from the words in this book it is apparent that he identifies with the general scientific community in their attitude about the popularization of science. The author comes across as being deeply cynical, and this is readily apparent throughout the book. It seems he has a score to settle with Sagan and he endeavors throughout the book to take Sagan down a notch and expose his faults and inadequacies. The book for this reason is difficult to read, for it confuses objectivity with blatant negativism. What is needed in the case of Carl Sagan is a biographer who will not engage in uncritical adulation and yet at the same time not become indulged in muckracking.

Indeed, the author makes it a point to bring out Sagan's alleged use of marijuana, his reluctance to assist his wives in housework, and his shortcomings as a father to his children. He discusses the zeal with which several scientists denied Sagan admission to the National Academy of Sciences, and Sagan's supposed inability to discuss scientific topics in depth. The author therefore patronizes the reader, with the implicit assumption that the reader has been unduly influenced by Sagan and needs assistance and release from this influence. The emotional responses that many have obtained by viewing Cosmos or reading some of Sagan's works is dismissed as being a result of Sagan's skilled oratory. It seems to never occur to the author that such responses are a natural consequence to being exposed to ideas that are accurate and true.

It is a little over ten years since Sagan has passed on, but his legacy is alive and well, and even though he has made many contributions to both science and its popularization, his most profound contribution, and one that outweighs the rest by many orders of magnitude, is his implicit demonstration that the history of the human species has been one of brilliant developments rather than war and strife. For a human being to purposely take the life of another is actually extremely rare, but it is frequently taught, both in educational institutions and outside of them, that the human species is a destructive and dangerous one. Nothing could be further from the truth, and the writings of Sagan illustrate this time and again. It would be incorrect therefore, and statistically invalid, to say that his view of history is romanticized and idealistic. It is the most realistic of any that currently exist, and deserves to be propagated at a large scale. There has yet to arise an effective surrogate to Carl Sagan, at least from the standpoint of someone who delivers the message in books, movies, and television as effectively as he did. But there are millions, or shall we say, billions and billions, of individuals that make up the collective genius of the human species, and it is these individuals, some known and some unknown, that are so eloquently described and championed by Sagan throughout his writings and personal life.

This biography differs from many of the other sycophantic works about celebrity lives in that it treats its subject as its subject treated the world: objectively. Those who have ears to hear, they will hear and agree.

Sagan was larger than life. A brilliant man with a passion for his subject he was none-the-less subject to human feelings and human failings. This book portrays the human side of Carl Sagan from his sudden, relationship damaging mood swings, to his desire to achieve the greatest good. It takes the myth of Carl Sagan and exposes the very real man underneath it all.

Sagan the scientist allowed his passions to distort his views at times but what great scientist hasn't had moments of irrational behavior? Sagan the humanitarian often demanded that things be done to relieve human suffering and end nuclear proliferation. He could be stubborn to the point of being annoying when it came to exposing frauds in science and the inhuman monsters (Edward Teller) whom he resented.

The book portrays a very human Sagan. A product of his era, he smoked pot, desired peace, devoted himself to his scientific calling, and became a legend. If you can stand to have the curtain drawn and the wizard exposed, this is the book for you. If you like fantasy over reality, move on.

The Emancipation Proclamation John Hope Franklin

When the colonies broke away from the mother country the new republic was based on the principles of democracy and equality. But as long as slavery was the cornerstone of this republic the ideas of democracy and equality were tainted. The Emancipation Proclamation set in motion the actions, which would make these principles true for all. In the book The Emancipation Proclamation, the author John Hope Franklin, tells a story of the emancipation of slaves through as it pertained to the author of the Emancipation Proclamation, President Abraham Lincoln. He leads us through the action before, during, and after the issuing of the Emancipation Proclamation in an attempt to give us a greater understanding of the actions taken by Lincoln in the freeing of a race.

Early in 1862 many people were calling on Lincoln for the emancipation of the slaves. But at that time Lincoln didn't think it wise to emancipate them for a few reasons. First of all, he knew that emancipation would culminate in a crisis in the Border States, because many weren't willing to fight to free the slaves. Secondly he doubted the legality of emancipating the slaves. Also he wasn't really sure if whites and Negroes could coexist in peace.

But by late summer of 1862, Lincoln was convinced that the time had come for a change in policy toward slavery. Several foreign governments sympathized with the South. But they condemned slavery as evil, and thus did not dare support the Confederacy. Freed slaves could serve as Union soldiers. Besides, many Northerners who had been indifferent to slavery now believed that it had to be stamped out. Lincoln decided to issue a proclamation freeing the slaves. He did not ask the advice of his Cabinet, but he did tell the members what he intended to do. On Seward's advice, he withheld the proclamation until a northern victory created favorable circumstances.

The Battle of Antietam, fought on Sept. 17, 1862, served gave Lincoln his chance. He issued a preliminary proclamation five days later. Lincoln declared that all slaves in states, or parts of states that were in rebellion on Jan. 1, 1863 would be free. He issued the final proclamation on January 1. Lincoln named the states and parts of states in rebellion, and declared that the slaves held there "are, and hence-forward shall be, free."

This was met with a wide variety of reactions. Some people sympathized with the Confederacy. Others doubted that it was even legal. But as Union victories fell into place a vast majority of people came to support the proclamation.

Actually, the proclamation freed no slaves. It applied only to Confederate territory, where federal officers could not enforce it. The proclamation did not affect slavery in the loyal Border States. Lincoln repeatedly urged those states to free their slaves, and to pay the owners for their loss. He promised financial help from the federal government for this purpose. The failure of the states to follow his advice was one of his great disappointments.

The Emancipation Proclamation did have a great long-range effect. In the eyes of other nations, it gave a new character to the war. It gave the North a new weapon in Negro soldiers. Also in the North, it gave a high moral purpose to the struggle and paved the way for the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. This amendment, adopted in December 1865, ended slavery in all parts of the United States.

Overall I found the book to be well written and very delightful. It gave an accurate account of the time during the Emancipation Proclamation. You could tell that the author held Lincoln in very high esteem, and that he felt Lincoln was the greatest instrument in the freeing of the slaves.

When the colonies broke away from the mother country the new republic was based on the principles of democracy and equality. But as long as slavery was the cornerstone of this republic the ideas of democracy and equality were tainted. The Emancipation Proclamation set in motion the actions, which would make these principles true for all. In the book The Emancipation Proclamation, the author John Hope Franklin, tells a story of the emancipation of slaves through as it pertained to the author of the Emancipation Proclamation, President Abraham Lincoln. He leads us through the action before, during, and after the issuing of the Emancipation Proclamation in an attempt to give us a greater understanding of the actions taken by Lincoln in the freeing of a race.

Early in 1862 many people were calling on Lincoln for the emancipation of the slaves. But at that time Lincoln didn't think it wise to emancipate them for a few reasons. First of all, he knew that emancipation would culminate in a crisis in the Border States, because many weren't willing to fight to free the slaves. Secondly he doubted the legality of emancipating the slaves. Also he wasn't really sure if whites and Negroes could coexist in peace.

But by late summer of 1862, Lincoln was convinced that the time had come for a change in policy toward slavery. Several foreign governments sympathized with the South. But they condemned slavery as evil, and thus did not dare support the Confederacy. Freed slaves could serve as Union soldiers. Besides, many Northerners who had been indifferent to slavery now believed that it had to be stamped out. Lincoln decided to issue a proclamation freeing the slaves. He did not ask the advice of his Cabinet, but he did tell the members what he intended to do. On Seward's advice, he withheld the proclamation until a northern victory created favorable circumstances.

The Battle of Antietam, fought on Sept. 17, 1862, served gave Lincoln his chance. He issued a preliminary proclamation five days later. Lincoln declared that all slaves in states, or parts of states that were in rebellion on Jan. 1, 1863 would be free. He issued the final proclamation on January 1. Lincoln named the states and parts of states in rebellion, and declared that the slaves held there "are, and hence-forward shall be, free."

This was met with a wide variety of reactions. Some people sympathized with the Confederacy. Others doubted that it was even legal. But as Union victories fell into place a vast majority of people came to support the proclamation.

Actually, the proclamation freed no slaves. It applied only to Confederate territory, where federal officers could not enforce it. The proclamation did not affect slavery in the loyal Border States. Lincoln repeatedly urged those states to free their slaves, and to pay the owners for their loss. He promised financial help from the federal government for this purpose. The failure of the states to follow his advice was one of his great disappointments.

The Emancipation Proclamation did have a great long-range effect. In the eyes of other nations, it gave a new character to the war. It gave the North a new weapon in Negro soldiers. Also in the North, it gave a high moral purpose to the struggle and paved the way for the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. This amendment, adopted in December 1865, ended slavery in all parts of the United States.

Overall I found the book to be well written and very delightful. It gave an accurate account of the time during the Emancipation Proclamation. You could tell that the author held Lincoln in very high esteem, and that he felt Lincoln was the greatest instrument in the freeing of the slaves.

Breaks down each job you have questions about. Shows you pictures that help with the written steps on how to do it yourself.

Whilst this book would be very good for 1970-1985 model sporsters it has not much useful information on belt drive evo sportsers eg. no information on belt tention or even how to drain the oil tank.

Griffin's text is well written and easy to follow. It is extremely thorough--that is, he provides details and examples that help exemplify the material. Many of my classes require poorly written textbooks that are unclear or jump all over the place, but Griffin's text is effectivly organized. Although it's expensive, as most are today, this is by far one of the best textbooks I've owned. If your professor doesn't explain things thoroughly, you'll probably still learn all you need to learn about management essentials through this text.

I bought this book through the marketplace thinking I was purchasing the text book. Wrong! The description needs to be updated to indicate this is a study guide workbook. The text is over [$$$] new.