C Books

There are other reviews that have addressed this remarkable book in detail. I'm gonna keep things simple.

This is a big book. When it comes to Egyptian art, big is good. Egyptian art is designed to impress, designed to communicate, and designed to impress due to the fine materials employed.

And this book is big.

Im going to the museum and I know you cant take pictures inside and you can purchase this book at the museum gift shop.The book is large and heavy --so Im buying it now so I can read up on things and dont have to purchase it there and carry it all the way home

The artifacts are arranged from earliest to latest, which creates a greater understanding of the arts and their progression. The arts themselves are mostly jewelry, coffins, statues, and painted carvings. There are many other objects like beds, chairs, etc. A discription of the objects is listed with it's use, material properties, aerchaeological founder, and a story behind each item.

IF YOU WANT TO VISIT THE EGYPTIAN MUSEUM IN CAIRO BUT FIND IT INCONVENIENT TO GET THERE THIS IS THE SECOND BEST WAY TO VIEW THE OBJECTS. THE COLOR PRINTS ARE AS GOOD AS CAN BE PRINTED AND THE DETAIL IN DESCRIPTION IS VERY HELPFUL. I HAVE A LIBRARY AND THIS IS THE BEST AND MOST DETAILED BOOK I HAVE SEEN IN YEARS WRITTEN ON ARTIFACTS FOUND IN EGYPT. 5 STARS !!!

This is definitely a cheaper way of seeing the museum in Cairo! When I went to Egypt last fall, we spent an afternoon in the museum. People could spend days in there and see new things. It is so packed full of artifacts that we could only stand to be in there for a few hours. Our brains could only absorb so much! This book is a good way to go back and learn about all of the things that we saw.
The pictures are large and unbelievably clear. I would recommend this book to everyone! Of course, I would also recommend a trip to Cairo...

If you're interested in Tibetan Buddhist iconography for whatever reason you can't go wrong with this detailed book. The author's original illustrations provide a wealth of examples of images in Tibetan art, and the text provides rich historical and doctrinal background for understanding why the symbols are important. Highly recommended.

Recieved the book promptly and in the condition promised. The book is an excellent source book. It does suffer from being without an index, for which the author apologizes. A source book without index is less than it should be. Still the images are excellent, and I assume the text is accurate. The author has spent a good portion of his working life in preparation: studying with Tibetan artists and craftspeople; and, becoming accomplished at rendering the brush drawings in an authentic manner. A good compaion book, especially as this does not have a index, is the "Handbook" by the same author

It's a more interesting and authoritative reference for this subject matter. This is due to Rinpoche being a qualified (I emphasise the word 'qualified') Lama and Tibetan scholar. Also at no point does Rinpoche compromise Tibetan Buddhism by giving away restricted information.

I love this book. Having found it a few years back at a tattoo shop in Santa Cruz, California, I was only able to look at it for a short time but I was able to gain so much knowledge as to the wealth of designs and deep meaning found in Tibetan art. This book stayed in my mind thereafter. Here it is a few years and a couple tattoos later and the book resurfaced on Amazon. Great price, great condition and prompt service. This book is great for one who has interest in Tibetan art and it's symbolic nature. The concepts are well articulated and with each 'type' placed into a different chapter it makes refrencing quite simple. If you are interested, get this book!

Great book, with lots of details. If you are interested in tibetan handicrafts, here you can get any tibetan design you can imagine.

I bought the 2200 series first with the answer book with test and I passed them all with flying colors. So I decided to go for the 2600 and passed that as well with flying colors. After that I decided to buy this book and continue, however, I did not do so well with the test as I would've liked. This is still a great book and I only wish that I could write the author a positive review on it; but I think he might be deceased by now. I truly recommend this book, but you must buy the tests with answer key. Don't cheat!!!

Hello Perspective Buyer
I have found that this is a great book. I have been away from school quite some time and needed a refresher course on my Grammar. This book corrects you as you go, giving you the drive to continue on with yes i got it. I will use it to enhance my skills.

Thanks Ron C

This is the best book on sentence structure ever. I wish I had this book when I was in school. I read alot of books on grammar and they never work for me. I usually forgot what I read after a day or two. I am an electrical engineer. Math and science are always my best subject while english is my worse.

This book show me how to combine simple sentences into compound and complex sentence. How to add adverb and adjective clause into the sentence to make it more meaningful. It show you the same example in many different ways. It is like doing algebra.

This book use a scientific approach. You will learn sentence structure and remember it for the rest of your life.

You can start anywhere, literally anywhere. Just open the book at any page and go; truly, it is that easy. I came across this book when taking an English Upgrade course in writing at the University of Toronto back in the 1970's - subjunctives, subordinate clauses, adverb clauses, appositives, punctuation, and on, and on, and on ... . My marks went from C's to A's.
The book eventually fell apart in my hands from the constant use and reuse as I referred to it when I needed it. I referred back to it all the time, simply because some of the topics are, to some extent, obscure and not easy to remember without constantly using them. Is your boss picking on you because you can't write? Are feeling out of the game because you can't get a handle on English grammar? - get the book (and use the book) and get your boss of your back and maybe impress your boss's boss as well.
I just ordered a new one, because my wife speaks English as a second language, and she will have no trouble using it what so ever.
It is a gem, a prize, and a wonder.
sincerely

I used an earlier edition of this classic textbook in Junior High 28 years ago, and it is EXCELLENT. What makes it unique is the layout which actually resembles a computer based training format with instant feedback. I only wish more instructional books utilized this format. You WILL master english grammer with this book.

This review mostly concerns the Enquiry. The Letter is primarily a defense of Hume's earlier Treatise of Human Nature, while his Abstract is an anonymous review of the Treatise. It strikes me as very funny, though not surprising, that Hume would review his own work. Funny because any author would give his right arm to get at least one favorable review when all the other critics are completely missing its point. Unsurprising because Hume was probably one of the only people alive at that time who could truly grasp all the facets of his radical philosophical claims.

The Enquiry was written after the Treatise. Hume, though he claimed the opposite, seems never to have really recovered from the blow he took from seeing his Treatise "fall dead born from the press." As a result, his Enquiry is far more cautious in the steps it takes. (For those of you who have read both, yes, I swear, Hume IS more cautious. Compare the claims.) A more robust philosophical stance is taken in his Treatise, while a more focused stance is taken in his Enquiry.

The Enquiry is mainly a work of epistemology and as such, scrutinizes our methods of acquiring knowledge. Making perhaps the most radical (and poignant) claim in all of modern philosophy, it posits, and supports, that there is NO causation, only conjunction. That, for example, when we see a glass drop and break, we cannot say we know gravity caused this (in the way we know two plus two equals four). All we see is constant conjunction. The connection is lacking, i.e., it is not inconceivable that the glass wouldn't bounce, turn to ash, or dissolve into sand (the way it is inconceivable that two plus two equals five). This, in effect, nullifies all the so called "laws" of nature that are formed by science. (Note that this does not state that there are no laws of nature, just that we really can never make the claim that we ever really know there are laws of nature.)

This could be thought of as the philosophical shot heard round the world. Agree or disagree, Hume must be answered. Hume has historically been charged with creating an intellectual and philosophical cul-de-sac with his skepticism. To paraphrase Bertrand Russell, Hume makes a claim which none can refute, but at the same time one which none can accept. In effect, Hume's philosophy seems to bind the human mind, stopping its journey of discovery and ultimately accomplishing what his predecessor, John Locke, set out to do, i.e., map the extent of human knowledge.

However, where one may see Hume's philosophy as shackles and fetters in the search for truth, one could also equally see his philosophy as liberation. Implicit in his philosophy is the idea that ANYTHING is possible. There are no shackles, no fetters, no limits; only those that we create for ourselves. Our limits are self-imposed, constructs of our observance (and inference) of connection. In this way Hume appears in the same light as the Eastern masters seeing that reality is not what we have (through experiential knowledge) believed it to be. It is something much more wondrous. In Zen, our causal thinking is the only barrier between the person and enlightenment. Hume could be seen as implying that when the idea of causality is removed, with only conjunction remaining in its place, the state of true knowledge and wisdom (true zen) is achieved.

This, of course, is only idle speculation. But it is stated so as to demonstrate the richness and immense possibility Hume's philosophy possesses when seen in the correct light. Instead of saying, "Nothing is certain," after reading Hume, one can say, with equal validity, "Anything is possible." The first statement approaches philosophy with despair. The second approaches it with a sense of childlike wonder and hope at the immense possibilities of reality. It approaches life as a beginning, not an ending. It approaches life as the philosopher approaches it.

If one accepts the methodology of Descartes in applying scepticism to reason and the senses, in effect denying the existence of all things but a "thinking thing," two entailments are logically consequent: Either Berkeley's idealism or Hume's scepticism. I don't accept Descartes' starting point, so I find the entailments confused and incoherent. But if one does accept Descartes' starting point, then the two extremes must be heeded. If for no other reason than observing the absurdity of either man's conclusions, it is valuable to read both entailments. But in their confused process, both men bring certain salient features to light.

Hume accepts Descartes starting point, making it his own. But to Descartes method, he adds Pyrrhonist scepticism: That all reason leads to infinite regress, and that all sensations (or impressions) can not be trusted.

Hume begins with the conclusion that all sense perception is either an impression or idea. Even memory and imagination, two other faculties of the mind, are conflated into these two species of perceptions, as impressions. Their difference is one of degree (vivacity), not of kind. Hence, Hume is the author of what is known as the "Copy Principle." Instead of unmediated, direct perception through the ordinary senses, all perception is mediated by the imagination into impressions and ideas. From this follows certain resemblances, contiguity, and causal associations between impressions or ideas, and from this association we develop a sense of self. But even the notion of causality here is one of implied inference, not of actual inductive reason. Hume denies there is any real causality that can be known, although we operate "as if" we infer cause from effect. Even probability is reduced to a mere association of ideas and/or impressions; because neither reason (which always leads to infinite regress) or senses (which can always be deceived) can actually be true. The Enquiry also treats of miracles and the testimony of others derisively; but don't we rely on the testimony of others who claim the earth is round rather than flat, just as we rely on others who testify to miracles in a byegone era? After all, few of us have direct experience with a spherical earth (Popper makes this observation).

Hume's method incorporates five kinds of scepticism: (i) methodological, (ii) conceptual, (ii) nomological, (iv) explanatory, and (v) reductive empiricism. His commitment to scepticism is not without some capitulation. While he denies absolute causality and inductive inference and probability in an actual senses, he relies on them for practical purposes. One can't remain a pyrrhonist for long; some elements of reason and some degree of confidence in impressions is necessary for ordinary life. But if one starts with Descartes' starting point, extreme scepticism is a necessary entailment. Which, after seeing Hume deny so much intuition, is it really worth starting with Descartes' scepticism? Answering that question is what makes Hume interesting.

David Hume was perhaps the leading light in the Empiricist movement in philosophy. Empiricism is seen in distinction from Rationalism, in that it doubts the viability of universal principles (rational or otherwise), and uses sense data as the basis of all knowledge - experience is the source of knowledge. Hume was a skeptic as well as empiricist, and had radical (for the time) atheist ideas that often got in the way of his professional advancement, but given his reliance on experience (and the kinds of experiences he had), his problem with much that was considered conventional was understandable.

Hume's major work, 'A Treatise of Human Nature', was not well received intially - according to Hume, 'it fell dead-born from the press'. Hume reworked the first part of this work in a more popular way for this text, which has become a standard, and perhaps the best introduction to Empiricism.

In a nutshell, the idea of empiricism is that experience teaches, and rules and understanding are derived from this. However, for Hume this wasn't sufficient. Just because billiard balls when striking always behave in a certain manner, or just because the sun always rose in the morning, there was no direct causal connection that could be automatically affirmed - we assume a necessary connection, but how can this be proved?

Hume's ideas impact not only metaphysics, but also epistemology and psychology. Hume develops empiricism to a point that empiricism is practically unsupportable (and it is in this regard that Kant sees this text as a very important piece, and works toward his synthesis of Empiricism and Rationalism). For Hume, empirical thought requires skepticism, but leaves it unresolved as far as what one then needs to accept with regard to reason and understanding. According to scholar Eric Steinberg, 'A view that pervades nearly all of Hume's philosophical writings is that both ancient and modern philosophers have been guilty of optimistic and exaggerated claims for the power of human reason.'

Some have seen Hume as presenting a fundamental mistrust of daily belief while recognising that we cannot escape from some sort of framework; others have seen Hume as working toward a more naturalist paradigm of human understanding. In fact, Hume is open to a number of different interpretations, and these different interpretations have been taken up by subsequent philosophers to develop areas of synthetic philosophical ideas, as well as further developments more directly out of Empiricism (such as Phenomenology).

This is in fact a rather short book, a mere 100 pages or so in many editions. As a primer for understanding Hume, the British Empiricists (who include Hobbes, Locke, and Berkeley), as well as the major philosphical concerns of the eighteenth century, this is a great text with which to start.

Hume, I and many others think, was the greatest philosopher to have written in English, and this is the book to pick up if you want to introduce yourself to Saint David's distinctive brand of classical empiricism. This is a must-read for anyone with even a passing interest in philosophy, and it's hard for me to see how anyone interested in the history of modern thought can avoid reading this book or the corresponding sections of Hume's Treatise.

As is well-known, the Enquiry concerning Human Understanding was intended as an encapsulation and popularization of the views Hume defended in Book I of his magnum opus, A Treatise of Human Nature. Hume assumed that book's commercial failure could be accounted for by its length, difficulty, and lack of accessibility, and so, being a man who desired literary fame, he hoped to acquire commercial success by presenting the same ideas in a more appealing and accessible manner. Unfortunately, it seems Hume misunderstood what the literati of his day were looking for in a philosophical treatise. For the Enquiry, like the Treatise before it, didn't bring him the fame he sought. Still, Hume did understand what goes into writing excellent philosophical prose, and consequently this book is a much easier read than Book I of the Treatise. Indeed, this book constitutes an excellent introduction to Hume's thought, and, except for maybe Berkeley's Three Dialogues, I can't think of another primary source that would serve as a better introduction to classical British empiricism.

Now, let's get to the ideas here. Hume, like the other classical empiricists, was primarily concerned with the psychological question of the origin of our concepts. About the answer to this question, the empiricists were all agreed--our concepts are furnished by experience, which includes both sensory experience and introspection (i.e., the experience of our own mental states). And the empiricists also agreed about the way we can justify our beliefs. Some beliefs are true (or false) in virtue of the ideas they contained, and we can know their truth (or falsity) simply by thinking about them; other beliefs are true (or false) in virtue of how the external world is, and we can know their truth (or falsity) only by drawing on our experiences of the world. According to Hume, all substantial conclusions about the world fall into this second category. That is, the truth (or falsity) of all substantial claims about the existence and nature of things in the external world can be discovered only by checking those claims against the evidence of our senses.

The traditional way of placing Hume within the story of empiricism goes something like this. Hume takes up the empiricism of Locke and Berkeley and pushes it to its logical conclusion. Whereas Locke and Berkeley hadn't been wholly consistent empiricists, Hume, the true believer, demonstrates that classical empiricism leads to a pretty thoroughgoing skepticism. Since he's wholly convinced of the truth of his empiricist premises, Hume is willing to accept the skepticism that goes along with them. However, those who aren't convinced of that his empiricism is obviously correct think that Hume has actually demonstrated the implausibility of his empiricism. If this is where empiricism leads, they think, then it's clear that we need to reject empiricism. Indeed, some, like Thomas Reid, view Hume's arguments as constituting a reductio ad absurdum of his sort of empiricism. On this interpretation, Hume's philosophy essentially presents a dilemma for all future thinkers: abandon empiricism, or accept empiricism along with Humean skepticism.

But a different view of Hume, one of Hume as proposing a wholly naturalistic account of the human mind, has recently emerged as a competitor to the general conception of Hume's place within philosophy sketched in the previous paragraph. This interpretation downplays Hume's skepticism and emphasizes his professed intentions to provide a positive account of the operation of the human mind that appealed to nothing beyond the evidence of our senses. According to proponents of this interpretation, Hume is most interested in a description of the operation of the human mind. He's describing what human nature allows us to know and what it doesn't allow us to know. Furthermore, he argues that our nature is such that, where it fails to provide us with the resources to acquire the knowledge we might want, it provides us with a natural habit of forming the right conclusions anyway. Even though our nature limits our knowledge of the world, it ensures that we possess the habits of mind needed to make our way in the world. Hume dubs all these habits of mind "custom."

If this view is correct, then Hume has abjured many of the normative aims of traditional epistemological inquiry. He isn't attempting to show how we can answer a skeptic or why we have good reason to believe what we think we know. Instead, he wants us to stand back from our everyday beliefs and think about the natural processes that result in them. How, exactly, do our minds operate? How do we come to think what we do about the world? Hume thinks that this sort of inquiry will lead us see that, at some point, the explanation of why we think what we think reaches certain brute facts about the operation of the human mind. When we reach these points, there is nothing more to be said. We simply can't help thinking in these ways, and we lack the resources to demonstrate that these ways of thinking constitute an accurate way to represent the operation of the external world. And, Hume claims, it turns out that many of the fundamental elements of our conception of the world--the belief that things stand in causal relations to one another, the belief that we can know that there is a world outside our minds, the belief the future will resemble the past--end up not being open to ratification by experience. With respect to beliefs of these sorts, we ultimately have to appeal to custom in order to explain their existence and popularity. Hume, then, can be seen as demolishing the pretensions of reason in order to make room for a wholly naturalistic account of human thinking.

First I would like to commend the excellent review of this book by CT Dreyer in which he correctly shows how Hume extended the empiricism of Locke and Berkeley to the point where skepticism seemed our only honest way of thinking about our knowledge of the world. Hume's questioning of induction, of how we can be sure tomorrow will be like today , his questioning of how we can trust our senses to know the outside world, his questioning of how we can hold our world logically together when analysis reveals that there is no necessary connection between ' cause' and 'effect' in everyday life action means he wakened not only Kant from his dogmatic slumber but Philosophy itself from the sense that it will provide absolute understanding.
Hume is a very clear writer. I remember reading the famous billiard ball account of causality in which our common sense view of ' before' and ' after' is questioned and taken apart. I believe Hume says after this account, something to the effect and ' still when we leave the room we leave by the door and not by the window'. A friend of mine in this class when the class ended opened the window ( on the ground floor ) and went out that way.
This is difficult and great philosophy. I do not pretend to understand it or its implications fully. A test of the mind and a necessary read for anyone who would know Western Philosophy.

Good balance between a reference book and one to learn from. I agree with most of the other reviews. The organization is great and progressive.

This book is very suitable for readers who already have some programming experience on other languages. It positions right there between beginner level and advanced topics. It also makes perfect balance between tutorial and reference book. It is one of the best C# books that I have read so far.

Overall this is a very good book for both beginners and advanced C# programmers. I would like to rate it 5-stars, however, I found the examples with some errors. The editing team should put more effort on reviewing the examples. Eventhough, I still recommend this book.

Hi Everyone;

I've read many C# books and I love this book. Mark's approach and ease of communicating a point, is great. There are many people who are very knowledgable, but have no skill of teaching a subject. As if they have closed their ears and kept talking.
I actually look forward to reading the next page/chapter, rather than see if I'm done.

Highly recommended!
..Ben

Even if I rated 5 out of 5, the book contains a lot of *very serious mistakes* in the code samples (I have found out more than 10). I'd like to think they are typo mistakes, and the code does not contain what the author intended to write. A very bad rate for the reviewers, who either do not know C#, or they did not review the code samples at all.

For anyone newly diagnosed with Hep C the initial reaction can be one of shock and the result can be deep depression. This book helps to shed light on some of the common stages of accepting this disease.

Excellent book for patients. I would also suggest any patient, friend, or family alos read "Hepatitis C - through a patient's eyes", written by Suzy Smith, who went through the treatment, and wrote her book to help others with hep c get through the process with a positive outlook.

I work as a therapist in a teen counseling program, and one teen girl has just been diagnosed with HCV. She's experienced all the common reactions: denial, grief, "This is a death sentence and God doesn't want me to be happy," and fear. I bought this book for her and she devoured it. Her entire affect changed, and now she's teaching US how to relate to her, how to talk about this diagnosis, why certain things WE say are insensitive or incorrect (without knowing it), and what emtional and lifestyle changes she needs to make for health. This book alone reduced her fear in half, and made her feel confident rather than powerless.

This is an excellent work for the layperson with very little
knowledge about Hepatitis A,B, C or the more exotic strains.
The authors describe a 6-7 week incubation period. Those
persons exposed have a 75-80% chance of infection with the HCV
virus and a 70% chance of developing the chronic form of
the hepatitis virus. In addition, there is a 10-20% chance of
developing the liver complication cirrhosis over a 20-30 year
period and a 1-5% chance of dying from a chronic liver condition. Hepatitis C is an RNA virus as opposed to a DNA
strain. Vaccination helps for the Hepatitis A and B strains
wherein 3 shots are administered over a 1/2 year period.
To reduce the likelihood of the disease, it is necessary
to reduce smoking , as well as exposure to all toxins.
The disease may be monitored with tests for bilerubin, albumin,
PT time and the anti-HCV antibody test. Treatment is enhanced
with reducing stress, commitments and responsibilities
until the condition is well under control. This work is perfect
for the layperson who seeks to prevent the disease or treat it
in the event of exposure and relevant symptomatology of
the disease process.

Although I think this is a good book to start with if you have recently been diagnosed, I find it lacking the depth I was looking for. It gives some great resources which is why I think it is a good book to start with, but at the same time, I would also suggest that you buy the following in addition to this. These are essential:"The Hepatitis C Helpbook"by Misha Ruth Cohen OMD and Robert G.Gish MD, "The Liver Cleansing Diet" by Dr Sandra Cabot, "Herbs for Hepatitis C and the Liver" by Stephen Harrod Buhner, and see if you can find "Who Gets Sick;How Beliefs, Moods, and Thoughts affect your health" by Blair Justice. The treatments out there are scary and can hurt you more than help you, so if you don't feel like poisoning yourself with a biotherapy, this is where to start.

While T.S. Eliot's "Love Song of J.Alfred Prufrock" is what he is most famous for, "The Four Quartets" merit much to reckoned with. I remember the first time I read "Burnt Norton". I was crashing at a friend of a friend of mine's place at UC Berkeley. I wanted to learn how to be poetic, and "Burnt Norton" was great help with such a matter. It is one of my favorite poems.

Even though Eliot's stock had dropped somewhat among academics in recent years this text will long be remembered for centuries to come. It is through this poem that Eliot heals the "soul disease" of the Wasteland. In our own hectic life where there is so little time for pause, so little time for reflection, Eliot reminds us of the experience had, but the meaning missed or misunderstood. Those isolated moments:the moment in the garden, the moment at the beach, or in a secluded chapel at nightfall, restore to us our spiritual humanity. Those who regard Eliot simply as a bitter and misanthropic poet should revise this opinion of him by reading Four Quartets to see that he was a very real man, a flawed man, struggling with the deformities of his soul.

The Four Quartets by TS Eliot is a classic and should not be missed. It is of the type of poetry that evokes meanings from their hidden places in us through the use of word trails that are only partially logical. Our own emotions connect things, so when it is read, don't approach it with the usual straining to decipher the meaning. The ring of a gong lingers after it is struck, something of a parallel to how the poem works. Fascinating, too, is its approach to understanding the elusive sense of time, but it is couched more in the sensibilities of the East than the West.

Among all these reviews, not one comes to terms with the very title of this opus: Four Quartets. When was Eliot anything but precise in his choice of word?

The inspiration for these poems -- or reflections -- are the late string quartets of Beethoven, those numbered from 12 through 16. It is the 5-movement No.15 in A Minor,Op.132, that seems to have exerted the strongest influence, with it's famous adagio movement, which Beethoven inscribed as the thanksgiving song of a convalescent.

Actually, No.15 was the 13th in order, but the Quartets were published out of sequence, which was not uncommon in Beethoven's time. The Late Quartets progress from the classic 4-movement No.12 and add a movement to each work up to the 7-movement Op.131 in C-sharp Minor. The 16th and final quartet returns to the classic 4-movement form. There is an expansion of form concluding with a contraction and return over the course of 5 works.

Like Eliot's Four Quartets, Beethoven's Late Quartets reflect upon time and faith -- and the 'speech' is often plain: repeated phrases that appear stuck in a groove, hammered chords, cheap tunes that seem to be lifted from a band in a local inn; from long-breathed melodies that look beyond what Wagner and Mahler will eventually bring to music, to cell-like motivs not heard again till Bartok and Webern.

The 'learned' aspect of Eliot's verse can lead us astray, so that we are forever parsing the meaning of the lines. I am taken with the sounds he makes as I read the poems aloud, and the sounds he chose to convey what the poems mean are, in a sense, the essence of meaning. From the first I was struck by the sheer sound of 'time' in the context of these Quartets, which are Eliot's swan song.

This is a tiny book, more like a pamphlet, only 58 pages long with large print and some blank pages as part of the design. But it is mighty in its impact. These "four quartets" are four of T. S. Eliot's poems meditating (among other things) on the nature of time - time past, time present, time future...If you are of my generation and have read the poems before, you might love carrying this little book around just to dip into it for a line or two, and maybe understand something you never understood before. (T. S. Eliot is not always an easy read.) If you have never read them before, I envy you!

This is probably the greatest compilation of original old school photos of the Hard Core heroes in Skate Boarding, Punk, and Hip-Hop. Friedman's photography and perspective as the ultimate insider on all that he shoots shows us the evidence we can't find anywhere else, particularly under one cover. From Jay Adams (Dogtown) to Ian MacKaye (Minor Threat, Fugazi) to Chuck D. (Public Enemy) and tons of others, how can you not own this book? The photography, and this book in general is in a class all it's own, head and shoulders above any other skate, punk or rap book of photos, and this one includes the best of all three genres. This book is a master piece and you'll be happy you got it, the greatest coffee table book for our generation.

Glen E. Friedman has been capturing the high voltage energy of today's youth and those who speak to them for a long time. In this very interesting collection of photographs he manages to focus (pardon the pun) on skateboarders, rappers, the guys who hang out on the streets all living on the edge. The energy he captures is inimitable. Reading this book immediately after viewing the museum exhibition of Jean-Michel Basquiat makes it all ring true. These may be the remembered commentators and artists of tomorrow. But for now, this is a worthwhile journey into subcultures you may not know. Grady Harp, July 05

This being the first true book published on the work of Glen E. Friedman is an achievement all it's own. A classic that has and will continue to stand the test of time. A document of a bygone era that will inspire generations for a long time to come.

F*I*V*E* S*T*A*R*S*

This is addressed primarily to Mike Carroll (Spokane, WA) and
Seer"japna" from whocaresville. It really cracks me up that someone would waste their time to write a negative review on Amazon, especially for a book of photographs, and ESPECIALLY when that book is obviously intended for a very specific audience. That audience doesn't seem to include wannabe deer-hunter, computer geeks from Washington state or "enigmatic" all-knowing types from Japan or somewhere either. I'd love to know who your heroes are... Jeff Foxworthy perhaps?

This is a classic. If you're even looking at this page it's obvious this book is a must. What other book on the planet has pictures of Black Flag, Public Enemy and Z-Boy Jay Adams?
And all of it's other hard core icons. This is an incredible collection of excellent photographic quality.

As conclusions for a trilogy got his one has got it right. Not only does Hines wrap up the story of our hero Jig neatly but we now get the back story behind Shadowstar and the full account of the forgotten gods. Personally I actually found myself skipping chapters a bit to keep reading about how this came about till the stories intertwined perfectly. In some ways this helps explain a lot from previous books but also shows that there is more to Hines than just Goblins.
Needless to say Jig manages to save the day in his own peculiar way which is most un-goblinish but at the same time allows the reader to say goodbye to Jig knowing that while these adventures may be over his troubles may not be especially with the revelation at the end that he is now on his own, though the writer did leave that door slightly ajar.
As noted by anther review Veka was absent which personally I thought to be a shame as I was wondering what became of her when she left the caverns. Perhaps a new series with her might be in order?
One can only hope that we will see more of this Goblin horde as while a good trilogy I really do want more which is a sign of an excellent series.

Third and final entry in the "Jig the Goblin" light fantasy series in which Jig heads off to war. Goblins, hobgoblins, humans, a tangled mix of political and personal grievances to be sorted out and settled, a cranky old female chief for Jig to please, not to mention trying to figure out the wishes and motives of his God, Tymalous Shadowstar.

Poor Jig! All he wants to do is retire peacefully to his corner of the mountain with Smudge, his fire spider, with enough to eat and an extra loincloth or two. Instead he's thrust into the midst of war with his busted-up knife, dwindling healing powers and a rag-tag group of what passes for loyal followers, which isn't saying much among the goblins. And there he goes, headed towards the ultimate battle in which the goblins attempt to secure their little corner of the mountain.

I really enjoyed this series; it's not your typical fantasy at all, more humorous and lighter in tone, yet with some underlying deeper message, too. I'll miss Jig now that his adventures appear to be done, but will definitely be looking for more from this author.

The goblin lair is once again under attack by the humans, and when they gain control of the lair they take out the strongest goblins, including the famous Jig the Dragonslayer. It seems that there is a war going on, pitting humans against an army of monsters - orcs, goblins and kobolds. However, Jig quickly discovers that he and his tribe have no friends on either side. Jig is going to have to use all of his brains and luck if he is going to keep himself alive...oh, and save his tribe as well, if at all possible.

I have been a fan of traditional sword and sorcerer, elf and dwarf type fantasy for many years, and I quickly fell in love with Jim Hines' Jig the Goblin stories. The characters are all quite interesting - taking traditional fantasy character-types, and then showing them from a goblin's viewpoint. Also, I must say that I really enjoyed the story; the author did a great job of holding up the suspense, and keeping you glued to the pages waiting to see what happens.

Overall, I found this to be a fun and very interesting book. I liked the story, and really liked the very interesting characters that populated it (especially the goblins). If you are a fan of fantasy literature, then you will enjoy this wacky, off-beat addition to the genre. I highly recommend it!

I heard that Hines is currently working on a new fantasy series. While I am looking forward for new work from this fresh, rising talent I do hope that he returns to Jig the Goblin someday. A friend recommended this trilogy to me just a month ago and I read all the books back to back. Hine's writing is a perfect blend of humor and fantasy - they match if not surpass the better books of Piers Anthony's early 1-10 Xanth books.

Just finished this one today, and once again I'm impressed with Jim's storytelling skills. This one has by far the best story, and paired along with Jig's most agonizing quest, I have to say this one was my favorite out of the three. Each chapter starts with an excerpt of Shadowstars life, separate from the rest of the story, but it ties in all together at the end.

Not a penny was wasted on this trilogy. I highly recommend this series to anyone and everyone.

This is perhaps the best and most relevant book about aesthetics, and their potential to influence people and history.

One of the hardest things as historians is to try and get into someone's head. The Book Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics do this but in away that other people have not tried. The book looks at Hitler from artist view point and sees Hitler from a different view which people has not looked at before. The person who decides to read this book will also learn how Aesthesis and be a powerful tool used by man. The book is now being sold at a very good price and I give it my personal seal of approval!

There is an incomplete list of sources for photographs and sketches based on page numbers in the Acknowledgements section of this book. The photographs and sketches are not individually numbered. I also think the references are unsatisfactory. For example, the author makes a number of assertions about a boyhood friend of Hitler in the Introduction but there is no background material to support these 'facts'. The book is interesting for its shift in focus (aesthetics) but there is an impression of sloppiness that affects credibility in my opinion.

If there is any justice in the world, Spotts' book will go a long way toward eradicating from popular consciousness the facile descriptions of Hitler as not much more than a cross between a risible, Chaplin-esque, comic book character and an insane, incarnate demon.

Part of the first notion of Hitler includes the idea that he ought to be dismissed as a failed, lousy artist. As Spott points out, the truth is that Nazism, like all self-styled utopianisms, was something like a gigantic project in aesthetics using people rather than pigments or plastics, and control and murder rather than downstrokes and glazing - and Hitler was the artist behind that (very popular for some years in Germany) project; he therefore must be taken seriously as an artist in this sense (obviously a grotesque, genocidal one).

As Spotts notes, even his hatred of Jews emerges from this context: the Jews are "ruining all art" by embracing atonalism, cubism, jazz, dadaism, etc., as well as ruining all life by embracing "Bolshevism". But in his mind, there doesn't seem to be much difference there: Picasso, Marx, Alban Berg - all the same. Since, in Hitler's view, art can't be separated from culture, and culture can't be separated from the state, and the state can't be separated from life itself, the eradication of the Jews becomes, in Hitler's mind, nothing less than a matter of national survival, or, strangely, to say the same thing, the artistically appropriate choice.

Spotts does a good job of underscoring another aspect of all this by calling attention to the seeming homoeroticism in Hitler's taste, particularly as it expresses itself toward the human being: at bottom (pun intended), Hitler preferred, aesthetically, buff blond males with blue eyes, i.e., "Nordic" types. The Jews, in addition to being greedy, "Bolsheviks", destroyers of art/culture/life, etc., just...looked "wrong". And so in this sense, in Hitler's mind, ridding the proper-looking race of these improper-looking portions of it was as obviously a necessary decision as would be getting rid of a "wrong" piece of furniture cluttering up an otherwise beautiful living room. (Spotts even includes a contemporary German cartoon caricaturing the physical features of a "typical" Jew).

But what I started out to say was this. Spotts surveys how Hitler very consciously used colour, shape, rhetoric, size, proportion, angle, material, sound, light, symbol, rhythm, story, pageantry, texture, surprise, music, fire, sculpture, formation, etc., to, quite literally, achieve a truly terrifying degree of control over the minds of his subjects, even as a conversion tool over those who had resisted him. (Spotts describes how awed even American visitors were by the Nuremberg rallies.)

And page by page, one begins increasingly to get a sense of what it would have been like, to be a human being, subject to all the mental and emotional strengths and weaknesses we are, living in a country (our world, for all purposes) which only a year or two before had been totally chaotic and depressed...and then to be stirred, roused, when that world around us begins to change, prompted to feel different, pleasurable things, think different, exciting thoughts, and in the end, perform different - and ultimately - indescribably horrific actions. In every way, we are preyed upon by the mesmeric, sick genius of a man who was rejected by the art school in Vienna, and who sought his revenge for this affront by dominating human psychology through all those elements I mentioned above more totally than perhaps any other "artist" of the 20th century.

I saw a BBC documentary a couple of weeks ago, in which several elderly Germans candidly recalled with fondness Hitler's early years. What they said they missed most were the euphoric feelings they had, going to the pageants and rallies, seeing the flags, hearing the speeches and the music, those feelings of belonging, meaning, "specialness". And for the first time, reading Spotts' book, in a really disturbing way, I could imagine what that might have been like, imagine that I might have been just as susceptible to the manipulator as millions of Germans had been. For the first time, how the whole thing could have happened seemed imaginable. Scary.

Bravo to Spotts for his brilliant and disturbing book. I would love to see him now do a documentary on this, using real footage.

Highly recommended.

In "Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics," Frederic Spotts takes the pop-culture theme of "Hitler-as-frustrated-artist" and turns it into a learned and compelling narrative that goes a long way towards illuminating the intellectual background of many recurring themes in Hitler's thinking and in the growth of Nazism as a movement in general. Given that most works on Hitler understandably focus on political and military history, the importance of Hitler's background as an artist is often forgotten. For instance, as Spotts points out, Hitler dedicated an entire chapter of "Mein Kampf" to excoriating modernist trends in the visual arts and music, tying them in with what he perceived as an international conspiracy of cosmopolitan Jewish leftists. Spotts expertly traces out the ramifications of these preoccupations for Hitler's years in power, not just narrating such well-known incidents as the exhibitions of "degenerate art" staged by Joseph Goebels, in which modernist pictures were held up to public ridicule, but also detailing the politico-aesthetic ideals that Hitler proposed in opposition to modernism - in particular, an ultra-nationalist, "Aryan" art, whose main themes were the glorification of Germany, Germanic culture, and the so-called Thousand Year Reich. Showing the importance of these ideas to phenomena as diverse as Albert Speer's architecture, Leni Riefenstahl's films, and the carefully choreographed Nuremburg rallies, as well as the work of specific Nazi artists, photographers, and sculptors, Spotts makes a forceful and intelligent case for seeing the rise of Nazi ideology through the lens of aesthetics. This is a useful, well-written, and compelling book that could be read with interest by scholars and laypeople alike.