N Books

I really do like the book because it shows a lot about math and what you can do with lines.If I could purchase this book I would take them and give them out to people for them to read it.This book is so amazing to me,it make me want to learn more.

I was given this book as a teenager, and never forgot it. I used to ask other people if they knew about it, but few seemed to have ever heard of it. I am an artist, and in spite of the use of 'math' in the title, thought this book was about art.
I missed ALL the math info and puns. (It was interesting reading the reviews of the math and science readers.) I can only tell you that the cleaver drawings tell stories that are universal. They work as well for art and life as they seem to work for math.
I have now given this book to many people. Every one of them has thanked me.
This is my favorite gift to give away for Valentine's day.

I purchased this book as a companion to the same named academy award winning animated short (1966?) by Chuck Jones. It was out of print until now. The short was recently released as a bonus feature on the DVD release of the Glass bottom boat. Bought the DVD, never have even looked at the main movie. It's enjoyable to watch a clever book come to life and be even more unforgetable then the written word.

I was given this book in 1980 by a college friend when it was in print in a smaller format. I am so pleased to see it again. If I could only own 100 books, this would be one of them.

Norton Juster wove more than puns and visual gags into this short book. Not to take an ounce away from those fantastic double entendres ("drawn and on edge").

There are references to social commentary "they all look the same anyhow," "freedom is not a license for anarchy," "why don't you find a nice line and settle down." There is amazing (for kids) vocabulary: quintessence, vector, potent, paralleliped. If you want to go there, there is also out of date vocabulary "Oh, what a head!" This book is rich.

Most of my high school math classes read "The Dot and the Line" at some point during the year, often as a read-aloud before a holiday. We find the puns, I explain the jokes, we discuss (briefly the social commentary), someone looks up the hard words, and they read a little boy-girl love story. It's the best kind of learning, the kind that happens when they think they are having fun!

Great book! I grew up with it, and rediscovered it just now. Wonderful!!

This is my favorite book. I purchased it when I was 18, and loved black and white photography. I am now 65, and still see the same basic beauty in the photographs. It's not about the 1950's, or showing American culture. It shows how universal and similiar all people of all races and cultures are. It shows young children playing, people falling in love, weddings, births, hard work, wars, death, grieving, and even hope from various people and countries from our planet Earth. One family. One people. This is a collection of love, not about a specific time, or place, or our differences. This is a book that shows our skin colors, clothes, and countries may change; but we are all the same.

I am so glad Family of Man is still available. I would also suggest that in conjunction with this book, you offer Family of Women, and Family of Children.

I first found this book at Foyle's in London, about 35 years ago, and it struck me. Since then, I bought five copies of the Family of Man, but no one remained in my home, because ever I felt the need to give this book to someone I loved or trusted.
What is making this book so precious to me?
First the idea itself of collecting pictures from the whole world (remember, when Steichen launched his project, the Cold War and the related hysteria was at its peak). This to demonstrate that all the human beings have to pass through the same events in their life: birth, growth, education, emotions, work, love, children, reflection, death. This apparently trivial concept leads to a conclusion by far less trivial: we all do belong to one family, our species, the humans (by the way, this thinking had not so great success in the past, nor the present seems to be more benevolent).
The Family of Man is exactly the visual demonstration of such a concept, by comparing the same events as viewed from different geographic and cultural perspectives, by means of photos from renowned or unknown photographers (of course, the pictures from the US are prevailing in numbers for logistics and statistical reasons: it was by far more simple for an US photographer to even simply receive the news of the Steichen project than for a photographer in Rwanda or in the USSR).
Steichen and his assistants made an impressive selection, shortlisting 503 pictures from the over 2 million they received. By the way, Steichen was a photographer, and his selection also considered the aesthetic side of the question: most of the pictures selected simply are wonderful.
The result is this book. I think no one on this planet can miss it, because The Family of Man is representative of a large part of our culture and on our very nature.
To give an example, in my opinion this book is at the same emotional and rational level as Homer's Odyssey, Dante's Divine Comedy, Melville's Moby Dick, primo Levi's If this is a Man, or the ancient Greek lyrics, to quote some comparisons.
I hope it will continue to be published; we, the humans, desperately need it.

I've always thought of THE FAMILY OF MAN as a magic book, ever since discovering it on the family bookshelves when I was a young child. The thing was (above and beyond the book's excellence and power to move anyone with a heart), for many years it seemed that every time I would delve into this book, there would be at least one new picture, one I could swear I'd never seen before. I still sometimes have that experience (although nowadays I tend to attribute it to an aging mind). I do remember at first being most impressed and guiltily fascinated by the powerful pictures of birth, which my siblings, our friends and I would look at, giggling in horrified wonder, and by those "nasty" (actually, beautiful) pictures of breastfeeding. I still remember our mom explaining that there was nothing "nasty" about any of those pictures, that they were true and lovely. That was only one of many life lessons she taught us, using images from this book.

Each image is a whole story, a world, unto itself, and the beauty is the connection of each one to all the others, just as we are all connected to each other in the family of man (as well as to all that the world comprises, like it or not). As others have written, I have given numerous copies of this book as gifts over the years. (That was not so successful when I gave it to my brother and sister-in-law as part of their wedding present. My brother had grown up with it, but his bride had never seen it before, and was somewhat horrified and disgusted by it; unfathomable to me. I don't think it lasted long in their home, if it ever made it there at all.)

Sometime in the mid-'90s I bought a new copy in a bookstore, and was upset and very disappointed to discover how it had been changed and messed up in that edition (which was, I believe, put out under the aegis of Disney's Buena Vista Entertainment). The look and feel of the paper were wrong, to begin with: too bright white and thick. Pictures had been cropped differently and (I think I'm remembering correctly on this), in some cases, laid out somewhat differently. I recommend avoiding such copies (I don't know what is being published now in that regard, or if the book is out of print, or if they've gone back to the original look and feel); the differences, though subtle, really are jarring and very much diminish the quality. This 'brightened' version came in the wake of a spate of "Family of..." books (Women, Children, and I think maybe a couple of others), that always seemed opportunistic, a little crass, and pitiful in their inability to approach the fundamental, universal, inevitable feeling of the original. Not that these others were without merit, but almost always, an original will far overshadow any sequels or copies that come after it. That's certainly the case here.

According to perpetual social and political critic James Bovard, the power inherent in government is alive and well; unfortunately, as he reminds us, they are not always necessarily accomplishing the people's will. Thus we find ourselves in circumstances in which governments are both larger and more powerful than ever before, while the individual citizen's ability to control and influence the course of his or her own life and liberty is becoming more and more problematic. In this stirring expose, the author explores how the federal government increasingly poses a threat to destroy individual rights and liberties in an attempt to preserve the fiction of government as superceding the citizen. Bovard wonders along with us how this state of affairs has managed to occur, and takes a thoughtful and impressive tour of the history of government control over individual liberties in an attempt to better understand it, and the future it presents for our cogitation.

Long before it was either fashionable or popular, conservative author Bovard was railing against the accumulating power and privilege of the crony-based capitalists who now seem to control the country. Here he draws blood from a dissection of the notion of state sovereignty, which he contends amounts to nothing so much as a glossy justification for the power elite's lust for ever-increasing power and privilege. Especially egregious in the author's view is the way the doctrine is being used to justify the behavior of others, to limit their rights to protect themselves, or to keep the fruit of their own labor. Indeed, all of this is food for thought. Moreover, Bovard is an interesting and quite eclectic scholar, someone who accomplishes both meticulous research and establishes the substantiation for his claims as he proceeds, and does so quite convincingly. He also seems to be profoundly well read, based on his wide use of quotations from such luminaries as Marx, Hegel, Rousseau, and Thomas Hobbes.

Thus, he manages to raise some thought provoking issues regarding our seeming need to regulate many aspects of private behavior (such as the use of pot) that we can neither effective enforce nor usefully demonstrate to be evil for the individual. Bovard argues quite convincingly regarding the potential dangers of allowing others to regulate our Constitutionally guaranteed civil liberties according to their own moral prerogatives. Bovard reserves special scorn for the so-called "Peter Pan" theory of government as the benevolent and paternalistic defender of the commonweal, and actively guides the reader through a critical review of the two hundred year history on the subject, a history he finds rife with examples through which government has repeatedly used its power to thwart rather than support the will and civil liberties of the majority. This is a splendidly researched book that reads well and which has some disturbing thoughts regarding the state of our polity. It is also one I highly recommend. Enjoy!

James Bovard is a bestselling libertarian author and lecturer, whose political commentary targets examples of governmental waste, failures, and abuses of power.
His Books:
The Fair Trade Fraud (1992)
Lost Rights (1995)
Shakedown (1996)
FREEDOM IN CHAINS: THE RISE OF THE STATE AND THE DEMISE OF THE CITIZEN (2000) Just finished this book and it is filled with examples of the "Statist" (politicians and bureaucrats) extorting money to facilitate their appetite for power and thus controlling as many aspects of life in these "United States"(separation into red and blue states does not make much difference). The research is excellent and the sources of "wisdom" are unrivaled. The EEOC and EPA appear to be the most outrageous of bureaus but closely followed by HUD and others; however, the Supreme Court clearly wins the "stuck on stupid" award between the three branches and the Senate is a clear choice in the Congress. Much of what Mr. Bovard relates is probably well known by the average political savvy reader, but his ability to back up his message with research, i.e. facts and sagacious quotes makes for an excellent read. Still, as one other reader stated, "What exactly can be done with the current apathy and addiction to the Welfare State by so many voters?".
Feeling Your Pain (2001)
Terrorism and Tyranny (2003)
The Bush Betrayal (2004)
Quotes:
"Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner." (1994). This is my favorite and another version could be a jackass (Dems) and an elephant (Republicans) fighting over "hay" (tax receipts) that does not belong to them. They then give some back to the "original owners" (taxpayers) after eating their "fill" (outrageous retirements, perks, etc.) and providing some to their "herd" (special interests). THIS ITEM WAS EDITED--From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia--LOG ON http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

"Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country." John F. Kennedy

"Your government knows your mind, and you know your government's mind." -Franklin D. Roosevelt

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." -George W. Bush (sometimes it is more honest to deviate from the script and speak from the gut!)

One would hope that a political tome written 7 years ago would become outdated; that politics might have changed since then. Sadly, James Bovard's "Freedom in Chains," is more relevant now than it was then. Despite a republican president (and congress) which, at one point, professed a "small government" platform, the size of the government has grown to unprecedented heights.

Bovard's "Freedom in Chains" not only documents the incursion of government into the people's liberty, but tries to dissect how this began. Not suprisingly, his first chapter points largely (but not exclusively) to FDR. With a careful eye, Bovard analyzes FDR's shifty rhetoric, which was able to effectively redefine the word "freedom": a word that used to mean "absence of coercion by the state," was now morphed to mean "safety provided by the state." Where we used to talk of freedom to buy and sell as one pleased, now we heard talk of freedom to buy and sell at "fair" prices as dictated by government. FDR (and others) were soon able to tell the citizenry with a straight face that freedom meant the ability of the government to take care of them via legislation.

From there, Bovard spends chapter after chapter highlighting examples of this paternalism run amok. "Cagekeepers and Caretakers" highlights how politicians use the idea that they were democratically elected to justify incursions into liberty under the guise that "that's what the people wanted." (And witness in 2004 the argument from the GW Bush camp that the president has a "mandate" from the people!)

In what might be the best chapter, "The Moral Glorification of Leviathan," Bovard documents how government has claimed for itself such things as: the right to tell farmers how much of what they can sell and at what price, the right to tell landlords that they may not discriminate by refusing to rent to drug addicts addicts (or any other group the government happens to like), and the right to tell companies what numbers of which "groups" they can hire. (A particularly great example was the government's failed attempt to mandate that Hooters employ as many male waiters as female waitresses!)

From here, we read documented accounts of government officials exempting themselves from laws the public is expected to obey (e.g. while it is illegal to lie to the police, the police may lie to obtain a confession!), etc. I confess that at this point, the book does become a bit monotanous. While an advantage to Bovard's "laundrey list" approach is its thoroughness in documenting claims, a disadvantage is that after so many examples, each one begins to lose its bite. (I must admit that after a while, I began to skim rather than read, as so many paragraphs began looking like ones I'd read before.)

Another small criticism is that I do not think that supporters of government's growth will be convinced by this book. In other words, this is not a book that argues forcefully that government growth is a bad thing in itself; rather, it documents the growth of government and assumes that the readers' symapthies will be against such trends. (For books actually arguing against statism, read Freidrich Hayek, Richard Epstein, or anything coming out of the CATO institute).

For all this, I must still give this book four stars. Bovard does an admirable job documenting abuses of government power and attempting to alarm an appallingly unalarmed public that a government unchallenged translates to a people unfree.

If you still labor under the delusion that the United States Government is here for your benefit, read this book. Mr. Bovard puts paid to that myth. Americans are now subject to such an unrealistic array of laws and statutes that every one of us is ripe for picking by some bureucrat looking to "get his numbers up". America has truly gone from a government "for the people" to one "against the people". Our constitutional protections are not worth the paper they are written on. If you manage to go through life without running afoul of some government functionary, you are indeed a luck individual. Read this book

I read this book when it was first published and as I was reading was half the time wanting to throw the book across the room. It was the frustration making me do that.

I re-read this book again and after 3 1/2 years of Bush I found Bovard to be very prophetic. What he said is even more true today than when he wrote it.

If you are concerned for that state of this country, don't just read this book, but think about and act on it.

Bovard is the anti- Micheal Moore.

Read this for a view of whats really happening.

Oh yes, DON'T throw the book.

Collins gets it. Baseball people have a certain way about them, and Collins obviously is one of them; he also knows how to write about them. This book--an in-depth and endearing look at the 2002 Chatham A's of the Cape Cod Baseball League--shines with the polish of good baseball writing about a great baseball subject. The players and team staff come to life, as does the ebb and flow of a summer on the cape. The poignancy of this moment in time, in these specific lives and in this specific baseball season, got me a little misty-eyed at the end. These are the kinds of dreams everyone should have, at least once in awhile, even when they have to come to an end.

This is such a big part of why I love baseball.

This is a terrific book for any fan of baseball. The book discusses three main characters in how they came to baseball how they played growing up and in college and then how the fare in the Cape League. I've passed the book on to several others who have loved it as well. A must for any baseball fan.

This book offers excellent insight into what collegiate players will do to make it to the big leagues. The glimpses of small town fans are also interesting. The reader is exposed to a part of baseball few know much about. Informative and fun to read.

Simply a fantastic book. Well-researched, intriguing, personal, etc. Shows why baseball is unique as compared to all other sports. There are so many nuances always to explore. The Central Illinois League, another amateur summer league, is a good example of a smaller version of the Cape Cod League as well. Either way, this book was an easy read on a long plane ride. No other sport could have produced a book's topic/story like this. Well done, Mr. Collins. Well done, baseball, as always.

If you like decent writing and/or, you are a baseball fan, just read it. I thought about the book long after I had finished reading it.

Michael Shapiro does a superb job not only of capturing the excitement of the Brooklyn Dodgers' last pennant-winning season but also of explaining just what the Dodgers meant to so many Brooklynites. Set against the background of the Walter O'Malley-Robert Moses negotiations that would determine the fate of the Dodgers, Shapiro provides logical proof that it was not O'Malley's intention to move the ballclub but that Moses kept making a fool of him to the point where remaining in Brooklyn would have been rather humiliating for O'Malley.

Though never elected to any office, Robert Moses was the most powerful official in New York City in the late 1950s. His power was further enhanced by the fact that the Mayor at that time, Robert F. Wagner Jr. was both lazy and indifferent, and would not have gone far in politics except for the fact that his namesake father was a very popular U.S. senator. If O'Malley was going to get the land and permits to build a new ballpark, he was going to have to go through Moses and Moses couldn't have cared less as to what became of the Dodgers.

O'Malley tired desperately to be taken seriously by Moses and the NYC politicians to where he even had the Dodgers play seven "home" games in Jersey City in 1956. In the end, the Dodgers moved to Los Angeles, not because O'Malley plotted to take them there but because L.A. politicians eagerly and actively courted O'Malley to move to their city while their New York counterparts, especially Moses, gave him the brush-off.

O'Malley wanted to build a ballpark at the junction of Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues, where multiple subway lines and the Long Island Railroad converge. Moses at first wanted O'Malley to build a ballpark in a hard-to-reach part of Bedford-Stuyvesant and later proposed having the city build a ballpark on the site of what is now Shea Stadium. Anyone familiar with Brooklyn knows that if you're riding the subway, it's easier to get to Yankee Stadium from Brooklyn than to go out to Flushing Meadows, where Shea Stadium is.

In any case Los Angeles made O'malley an offer he couldn't refuse--300 acres in the heart of the city, where multiple freeways converge. New York officials made no effort to compete as Brooklyn didn't count for much in their eyes. When the Mets were created a few years later there was no question in their minds that they should represent New York and use the orange "NY" logo formerly used by the New York Giants, rather than the Brooklyn Dodgers' "B."

50 years have now passed since the Dodgers moved, and Walter O'Malley has been elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame. The ballpark he built and paid for (which opened in 1962) remains one of the most beautiful and popular in major league baseball. Shea Stadium, on the other hand, built by Robert Moses with taxpayers' money and opened in 1964, will soon be torn down. What is more, New Jersey Nets owner Bruce Ratner is currently trying to arrange to move his NBA basketball team to that same junction in Brooklyn that O'Malley originally wanted.

Michael Shapiro is an excellent writer and his book is highly recommended!

This book probably doesn't get the sales or the attention it deserves, because the title and the cover make it look as if it's intended just for baseball junkies. But it's far more than that. In just 332 pages, Shapiro tells four stories:

1. The story of the National League pennant race in 1956.
2. The story of why the Dodgers (and therefore the Giants as well) decided to move to California in 1958.
3. The social, demographic, and economic changes that Brooklyn (and, by extension, much of urban America) experienced in the post-World War II era.
4. Thumbnail sketches of the personal lives of the core players in the Brooklyn Dodger lineup from 1947 through 1956.

None of these four themes is given short shrift. Furthermore, Shapiro has organized this book beautifully. He seems to have done a perfect job in choosing exactly where to break the narrative of the Dodgers' wins and losses, and insert a section about the changing character of a neighborhood in Brooklyn.

Not only that, but Shapiro's writing is superb. Here is his account of the last pitch of the last Dodger game of the regular season - a game they had to win in order to clinch the championship, with Dodger Don Bessent pitching to Pittsburgh's Hank Foiles:

*****
Don Bessent went into his windup. The last thing he thought before releasing the ball was, he later said, "Tight, keep it tight."

Hank Foiles swung. The next thing he heard was the thud of the ball in Roy Campanella's mitt.
*****

You don't have to be a baseball fan to enjoy this book. You just have to enjoy good writing and a wonderful story, wonderfully told.

I have long been interested in the old Brooklyn Dodgers, having read multiple books on the subject. This is among the best. First of all, it is an excellent read. There is plenty of baseball included in its pages, and the Dodgers teams of the 50s were always interesting. But I learned much more than I expected from this book about the politics that led to the team's move to California. It's too bad the franchise couldn't have remained in Brooklyn, but the reasons they left were different than I would have imagined. The book also paints the picture of a post-World War II New York that was rapidly changing. As a lover of baseball, history and baseball history, I thoroughly enjoyed this book.

Wow. First let me say that I'm not a Brooklyn resident or a Dodger fan and picked this book up without knowing anything about it. The book turned out to be one of the best baseball books I've read in quite some time.

I was drawn into the book immediately. It is clear in the Prologue that Shapiro is a very good writer and that the book is as much about the fifties and Brooklyn as it is about a pennant race. The book is enjoyable on both fronts.

Shapiro does a great job of weaving a portrait of the changes going on in Brooklyn in the mid-fifties and giving younger readers a good idea of what it was like to grow up in that era. It is clear that Shapiro has done quite a bit of research and I think the reader really gets a good look into the personalities of the players and other characters in the story.

Any fan of baseball history will do himself a favor in buying this book. It truly deserves more acclaim than it has received.

THE LAST GOOD SEASON, by Michael Shapiro, earns itself a provisional rating of FIVE STARS in my mind, based primarily on the quality of the writing (which is uniformly excellent) and the depth of the research (which, within limits, is exhaustive). Yet the book deserves, like Roger Maris' "61*", to be only a qualified ***(**) success.

Much of that qualification comes from Shapiro's heavily touted and slanted thesis that Dodgers owner Walter O'Malley was not responsible for the Dodgers' departure from Brooklyn in 1957, after Robert Moses refused to build a replacement for the aging Ebbets Field.

Shapiro's grasp of the facts regarding Brooklyn is somewhat fuzzy. He says, "Jews went to Midwood [High School], poor blacks to Jefferson." Yet in the Dodger era, Brownsville was predominantly (70%) Jewish. It was not until later that Brownsville became a black neighborhood. Shapiro waxes rhapsodic about Midwood (his childhood home?) but slights the rest of Brooklyn. He admits that by the time he became aware of the Dodgers they were gone. Ironically enough, even while granting O'Malley absolution in absentia he makes and supports every argument as to why the man did not deserve it.

Shapiro blames, among other things, "white flight" for the Dodgers' relocation, but then argues that fans come in all colors. It's as if, in pardoning O'Malley, he is trying to convince us of something he really doesn't believe himself.

According to Shapiro, "Robert Moses is the bad guy in this story." This is an incredibly strong statement, particularly since Shapiro admits in many places that O'Malley was mendacious, that he was arrogant, that his plans for a new Buckminster Fuller-styled stadium seemed, at best, to be for public consumption only (O'Malley stole the scale model from the actual designer, Billy Kleinsasser, and used it without permission or recompense at public events), that he dealt with player and staff salaries in increments of hundreds and thousands of dollars not hundreds OF thousands of dollars (i.e., star pitcher Preacher Roe claims his highest Dodger salary was a paltry $28,000.00 in 1955), that he did not understand the "Little People" who were Dodger fans, that he once (as a youngster) traded a stack of Dodger baseball cards for one Giants' Christy Mathewson, that he fined employees who mentioned Branch Rickey's name in his presence, and, in short, that he was not really a fan of the team he owned.

Shapiro wants to paint horns on Robert Moses' head, and in some sense they do belong there, but not necessarily in the sense that Shapiro would prefer. Like the Master Builders of Ancient Egypt he had virtually unlimited power in his sphere. The ironically-named Moses was a man with a vision for New York, and he set about creating that vision of shining, rising buildings (such as Lincoln Center), vast bridges (the Throgs Neck, the Whitestone, The Triborough, and the frighteningly huge Verrazano are all his), and endless parkways (as a sampling, the Cross Island, the Belt, the Northern State, the Southern State, the Meadowbrook and the Wantagh) linking New York City and its expanding suburbs in a net of urban development. Yet this visionary had pathological flaws. Monomaniacal in his sphere, he had no compunction about unilaterally razing hundreds of city blocks, evicting tens of thousands, and altering the neighborhoods and neighborhood patterns of New York without a thought. Such changes brought other, unanticipated changes---the "through" expressways of The Bronx relegated it to a kind of backwater status accelerating its descent into slum conditions, and Moses' chopping up of neighborhoods in Brooklyn balkanized the Borough into a patchwork of disconnected rich and poor enclaves. Moses was more successful on sparsely-settled Long Island and in Westchester, where his road network created rather than changed demographic patterns.

When these two prima donnas met head-to-head, they treated each other with barely-concealed contempt. Although Moses was at first favorably disposed to a new stadium in downtown Brooklyn, this agreement soured within days. Without access to O'Malley's papers (which he was refused by the O'Malley family), the reason for this sudden souring is unknown, and ripe for speculation. Moses pressed, at first, for a new stadium in Bedford-Stuyvesant, a declining neighborhood; O'Malley refused. Moses promised him a new stadium in Flushing Meadow, Queens (the future Shea); again, O'Malley refused, declaring that the team was to remain in Brooklyn---he countered with an offer to build in Brooklyn, on the site of a ramshackle meat market. Moses refused to condemn the property (a first for him).

This bickering was never about questions of civic-mindedness, fan appreciation, nor humanitarianism. This was strictly a personal issue between the two men that affected millions of people.

While this was going on, the 1956 Dodgers struggled successfully through their World Champion season. Shapiro's snapshot of the team is far more detailed than his portrait of the politics, and is a joy to read. Shapiro is at his best as he describes the dynamic tensions that existed between the various Dodgers, the great negotiator of personalities, Pee Wee Reese, and their fanbase. It is clear that Ebbets Field was no longer a suitable home, at least without major modifications. Parking was very poor, a serious concern in the emerging era of the suburban commuter fan; the stadium itself needed to be revamped, the plumbing fixed, the seating rearranged. Still, Ebbets Field was only 45 years old, and was a solid structure, despite its flaws.

If O'Malley was indeed "desperate to stay in Brooklyn" as Shapiro posits, then why weren't his efforts directed toward staying? Why was he engaged in a stalemated battle of wills with Moses over a new stadium? Perhaps O'Malley simply wasn't "desperate" enough. Certainly, Yankee Stadium and Fenway Park still stand in less than desirable locations, but they draw dedicated fans nonetheless. Had O'Malley spent a part of his considerable fortune buying up some surrounding properties and building a parking complex, and then incrementally improved Ebbets Field with better seating and new amenities, the Dodger fanbase would have continued to travel to Flatbush.

O'Malley did not do this. He wanted land, and a lot of it, on the cheap---had Moses condemned the meat market, O'Malley would have bought the property for pennies on the dollar, a very attractive possibility to a man who squeezed a penny hard enough to put a permanent wave in Lincoln's beard. Los Angeles offered him that and he jumped, literally across a continent, to get it, taking his team about as far from Brooklyn as it was possible to go in his desperation to stay. Yet, if he'd REALLY wanted to stay, Flushing Meadow beckoned. And despite the fact that Flushing is not Brooklyn, the New York football Giants play in New Jersey's Meadowlands and still remain a New York team (the O'Malley-inspired move of the baseball Giants from Manhattan to San Francisco is another issue). In 1957, many of Brooklyn's fans were Long Island transplants, and more would be as time passed. Queens, while not the best of all possible worlds, would have been a convenient waypoint for fans from the old and new neighborhoods.

For that matter, had either O'Malley or Moses given a damn about Brooklyn, they would have cooperated in building a new stadium and reinvigorating Brooklyn. Neither cared to.

"Walter O'Malley was not a bad man. He was devoted to his wife and his children loved him," Shapiro points out. That's nice to know. But O'Malley was also an S.O.B. in business. The two are not mutually exclusive. "Only a sentimental man," Shapiro writes, "would have stayed." Maybe so. But the Dodgers and the Dodger fanbase needed a sentimental man, they needed a fellow fan, they needed a man who loved the team and who loved Brooklyn. What they had was Walter O'Malley, who saw the team merely as a moneymaking concern. O'Malley's actions speak for themselves, regardless of Shapiro's revisionism. And if O'Malley was "not unique" among team owners but merely "so obvious" about his profit motives, the blame is still his for eroding the spirit of The Game, and beginning the slide to where we are today in baseball with its overly mobile nonentity franchises, bloated payrolls, stars on steroids, cupidity and stupidity, and fan disinterest.

In the face of necessity, sentiment oft-times does not serve. But in circumstances of choice, such as faced by the Dodgers, sentiment can be a hedge against callousness.

What O'Malley (and Moses) failed to grasp is that a ball team is more than an agglomeration of men in uniform standing around in an open field. He (they) failed to grasp that a baseball game is more than just nine innings and a cold toting of runs, hits, and errors. It is a conversation at a water cooler, a friendly argument over lunch, an invitation to meet at the ballpark on Saturday afternoon for dogs and beer and a chance to see The Duke of Flatbush. It is a sense of neighborliness, a sense of pride, and was---still is---an important part of Brooklyn's special identity.

As Roger Kahn says in The Boys of Summer, "In the best of all possible worlds the Dodgers would be in Brooklyn and Los Angeles would have the Mets."

That's as it should have been.

As a former Outward Bound instructor who loves adventure, I found this book riveting. As a business coach I know that learning occurs when we are on the edge, in a little less familiar place. This story supplements the narratives about Shackleton because Perkins takes the story and applies it to leadership. Hence, it becomes contemporary. I liked some of his points so much that I referenced him in my book. I strongly encourage you to read this book. Doug Gray, PCC, author of [ASIN:0975884158 Passionate Action: 5 Steps to Extraordinary Success in Life and Work]]sionate Action.

Perkins uses Shackleton's Antarctic expedition of the early 1900's to identify ten leadership strategies. These stategies have proven useful for me in both military and civilian business settings. Perkins uses real-life examples form the Shackleton expedition in Part One to identify the strategies. In Part Two he uses recent (from when the book was written) business example to demonstrate how these strategies can be applied. This is an easy read and the stories of the Shackleton expedition helped keep my focus on the people that we lead while keeping the ultimate goal in sight. The title of this book applies whether you are leading at the edge of the world, the edge of survival, or at the edge of competition.
"Fortitudine Vincimus"!

This book is a "must read" for everyone aspiring to become a leader. The different life and death situations that Shackleton and his men faced, and how they overcame the obstacles in their way, is an example for all to follow.

The book is written masterfully, allowing the reader to reflect on how different leadership techniques were applied and how to apply the techniques to the situations particular to the reader.

Outstanding Work!

A fantastic text based on an epic journey. The history of Shackleton's ill-fated expedition is a sharp contrast to the modern view which epitomizes personal liberty as the highest virtue.

This book features vignettes from an expedition faced with nearly insurmountable odds that highlight the difficult choices faced by Shackleton and his men. In the face of adversity, they managed to endure, though not without cost. Perhaps the most moving part of the narrative is knowing that, after he and a few of his men made it (barely) to the safety of a remote whaling outpost, he insisted on mounting numerous rescue attempts for his other stranded crew-mates until they were successfully extracted.

I highly recommend this book to anyone, whether or not you are involved in business management. As a father, I found many of the examples and stories inspirational, and I have shared them with my children to teach them the virtues of perseverence and the responsibilities of leadership.

The author, Dennis N. T. Perkins, shows extraordinary insight in leadership with 10 clearly stated principles. Based in strong part on Shackelton's expedition, these 10 principles are not only clearly stated, but truly make a difference. It is obvious that Perkins understands leadership. The book is easy to read, but takes plenty of mental energy. This book should be read by any manager, and should be considered a classic.

Can you imagine my surprise when I encountered this book on Amazon.com!

I am 18 years old and I read "Mufaro's Beautiful Daughters" in elementary school and I was enamored with the story then! And I still am. This "African Cinderella" is sure to resonate with young girls and make them curious about Africa.

It is the story of an African King who has two beautiful daughters, only one of them, Manyara, is mean, nasty, and "haughty" (this book is where I learned that word!) while Nyasha is sweet, compassionate and kind. When their father learns that a ruler of another kingdom is to take a wife, he decides that both of his beautiful daughters should go. However, Manyara arrogantly leaves alone to get there before her sister, ever so certain that she will be chosen.

On the way both her and her sister encounter a series of tasks and through these, their true characters are tested.

Other than a great story, the illustration is absolutely beautiful! They are artwork unto themselves. Love this book! I can't wait to purchase this for the little girls in my life! Or, i just may buy it to reminisce!

Wonderful book about Manyara and Nyasha, daughters of an African King. This books shows that beauty comes from within. Manyara is a selfish sister and wants nothing more than to be queen and she will stop at nothing to be it. Nyasha is kind and loving and only wants to be happy. She sees the beauty in nature and people. A king from the neighboring town is searching for a wife and immediately Manyara wants to be queen. Manyara gets up early and sneaks to the village of the King but she is met by a little boy who wants food, and a elderly woman whom she is told to be kind too. She doesnt give the boy food and is verbally mean to the old woman. Nyasha goes through the forest and finds the same people but this time she gives food to the little boy. She is met by a woman who points the way to the city and she is kind to her and gives her sunflower seeds. As they approach the city, Manyara runs out and crying saying that she saw a snake with 5 heads and was telling her how rotten of a person she is. Nyasha is brave and walks in only to a find a simple snake for whom she was friends with. He tells her that he is the king and the elderly woman and little boy in the forest. He then asks her to be his queen because she is the most beautiful and kindhearted of them all.

The illustrations are breathtaking. The story emphasizes the true ugliness of getting to the top no matter what, while at the same time showing the beauty of compassion, empathy, and taking the time to make true connections with others and embracing their essence. These are values that we must instill within our children. I read this story to my own beautiful daughters over and over and it opens the door for deep discussions about the nature of their special bond as sisters and the need to not face one another as competitors, but as lifetime companions and support for one another.

This book is about these two sisters Manyara and Nyasha father of Mufaro. Manyara is the rude sister. Nyasha is the warm loving sister. One of them would be getting married to a king and the other will be their servant. Manyara well she wanted to get a jump start on things so when she was going to find the king she seen a boy (that was in need for food) that she refused to give food to, then she came apon a old lady she didn't listen to, she also met up with some trees that laughed at her and she laughed back at, and last she came upon a guy with his head in his arm.
So if you really think people that are rude won't get far and their rudeness will just catch up with them later as they go threw life. This book has inspired me to be a better person in many ways. This book is an amazing book it not only expresses the persons outside feelings but it expresses the persons inside feelings.

This story is based on an African tale that is similar in nature to Cinderella. In this story a man named Mufaro had two beautiful daughters, one named Manyara, and one named Nyasha. Manyara is rude to Nyasha, who just calmly bears it. When a call comes saying the Great King wants a wife, Mufaro plans to take his daughters to the palace the next day. Manyara decides to leave in the night to make she is chosen to be Queen. During the journey she is rude to a number of people, who turn out to be the King himself, shape-shifted into those forms as well as the form of a garden snake well-known to Nyasha. When Nyasha passes the next day, she is kind where her sister was rude. Needless to say the King picks Nyasha, and they live happily.

The story is told well, and the language used is wonderful, though not quite as wonderful as the illustrations. They almost look more life-like than photographs. The way lighting is used is amazing, and they are just stunning pictures. Everything about this book is wonderful, with nothing to detract from it.

Loggie-log-log-log

Like many of the reviewers before me, I've grown tired of the NFL and NCAA Division I football, and now prefer small college and high school football. This is a great way to be introduced to the game at that level, although you never really get to know John Gagliardi as well as you'd like (a fact that frustrates Murphy). Murphy will at times give away how a particular game ends early in the chapter dealing with it, but it's never a great distraction because the story is so well told.

The only shortcomings to me are the lack of photos or stats, plus I detect an occasional bit of smugness on the part of both Murphy and his wife in their dealings with the locals (News flash: Minnesota is NOT the Bay Area), but he IS a very funny and perceptive writer and this is a worthwhile read.

I really enjoyed this book that is about a football season, but also about so much more, including marriage, raising children, coaching and the personalities at this small school in Minnesota. While we often think of Lombardi and Bear Bryant school of hard-driving coaching, it turns out the softer style of coach Gags can also be successful. This book reminded a lot of First and Last Seasons: A Father, A Son, and Sunday Afternoon Football, another book about football but also a lot more.

I read this book after reading Mr. Murphy's "How Tough Could It B?" and loving it. Although I'm not much for football I thought I'd give this book a try because I enjoyed his writing. It was terrific - a great commentary on St. John's and its coach as well as another look at Mr. Murphy's refreshingly real family (well, perhaps they are not real but they sure are like my husband and children). I'm waiting for another book please!

Lack of pictures and statistics of Gagliardi's 50 years in coaching cause this book to come up just short of 5 stars. Also, I expected the author to provide a few more "game details". I actually found the epilogue, where St. Johns makes it to the Divison III championship game the following season, more exciting than the body of the book.

If you're as tired as I am of the NFL schlock, of having to take the time to remind the high school kids you coach every season that taunting and trash talking are not a part of the game, then you will absolutely love this book. Mr. Murphy is funny-- so funny, in fact, that several times I laughed so hard I couldn't even read the passage in question out loud to my wife and had to hand her the book. Mr. Murphy is also jaded, tired of spending his life on the road dealing with the overlarge head of professional and big college Div-1A athletes.

You won't find jerks like Randy Moss or Brian Bosworth in the pages of this book, unless they are mentions solely as a stark contrast to the genuinely respectful and worthy athletes of St. Johns. Reading this book reminded me of the potential of all athletics to reap great good from the hearts and minds of youth, and also reminded me that, as a coach, it's my responsibility to sow those seeds.

The book can be enjoyed on several levels-- as humor, as a description of a sporting season, and above all, as a triumph of what football is supposed to be-- fun for everyone involved, ESPECIALLY the players.

I hope you enjoy it.

This book would be an invaluable asset to have handy to anyone who reads a lot.It is a large book ,1144 pages.It is the type of book that will be turned to frequently when you come across something in your reading that you would like to know a bit more about without going to a lot of trouble or checking a lot of sources. The book covers a lot more than literature and authors. It is an encyclopedia in every sense of the word.For instance ,if you have never heard of an author,or a book,that is mentioned somewhere ;there's a good chance that here you will find enough to serve your needs.However;if you do know the author and his works ,you will probably basically know what is in this book.
Although most of the reviewers are very "well read";don't assume this is not the book for the "ordinary reader".I consider myself in that second group;and I can vouch that it is very down to earth and jam packed full of information,usable for everybody,regardless of their background or knowledge.
I must also warn you that when you pick it up there is a great tendency to flip around it from one thing to another. It is no problem to spend an hour or more glancing through it. It is also the type of thing that can be left around for anyone to pick up,open at a page at random;and they will find something to interest them.
It's difficult to say what all's in the book;because it covers all types of things other than literature.
Just a few for instances;

Pg 321..we get all the rulers of England from 829-
present,including their time in office.
Pg.44..explanation of Gordian knot.
Pg.434.. background of the guillotine.
Pg.491..Huguenots
Pg.581..Last Supper
Pg.717-718..Napoleon I,II &III explained.
Artists are covered.I found it interesting that max Ernst is included but not M.C.Escher. We get definitions such as epigram,epilogue,epinicion and epiphany on Pg.325.A flip of pages to 1020, and we get a short explanation of the Thirty Year War,mixed in with authors and book titles.
What I've been trying to convey is the wide range of entries in the book and that it covers much more than literature and authors. It is a bit of a guess what you will find;but that is part of the enjoyment you will getfrom this book.You'll find "whore of Babylon" but not "The Butcher's Apron".The Pulitzer Prize winners are all listed.
I could go on forever;I'll quit now,as most readers have gotten my pointby now.I hope so,anyway.
If you buy this book,or buy it for someone who reads a lot;you'll never regret it.

This is the kind of work which when first dipped into leads to the temptation to dip into it more and more . The sheer amount of information is so great, the entries so various in subject that endless delight is to be found in learning more and more. There are however as with most things, a few problems and limitations.
Take for instance the opening entry of the Encyclopedia, the entry on 'Aaron'. We truly learn important things about Moses' brother and mouthpiece. But for anyone who knows Biblical literature not to speak of its commentaries, the entry is a shortcut of shortcuts. And thus misleading. For it does not tell of Aaron's role as leader of the Temple ceremony worship, does not explain his connection with Moses in a deep way, nor even mention their sister Miriam, does not tell of the death of Aaron's son in offering up strange fire, does not tell anything about Aaron's role as ' man of peace beloved by the people'. One of the great farewell scenes of world- literature Aaron's climbing to the top of Har Ha-Hor is not mentioned.
I take this one example to indicate another simple truth. An encylopedia of this kind is always best on a subject one does not really know much about. Then anything we are told , adds to our knowledge if not necesarily our understanding.
In checking out a number of articles I did not find ' inaccuracy' here. In confronting other subjects I knew nothing about I did have a sense that I was getting reliable information.
This is again a good tool and source for attaining first knowledge of a subject.
However if one really wants to know and understand the meaning of a particular subject my recommendation would be to supplement this work with other sources of information.

I love my 4th edition and am glad I've kept my 2nd edition as now I have the best of both worlds. New info in 4th and the deleted info in the 2nd. The only thing I would do to improve the next edition is go back to the alphabet tabulations.

He drove an ambulance during World War 1, before becoming one of America's most famous novelists. Who wrote "Death of a Salesman"? Who wrote "Manhattan Transfer? Who created the character, Sherlock Holmes"? Holden Caulfield was the main character of what famous novel? Who wrote "Catch-22"? These are just some of the questions that "Benet's Reader's Encyclopedia" can answer. Bruce Murphy's book offers biographical notes on writers, synopsis of famous books, plays and poems, descriptions of characters and detailed explanation of literary terms and movements.

I have had my copy of Benet's Reader's Encyclopedia since its publication in 1987 and have found no better reference tool for writing research papers and for general literary inquiries. Although "Benet's Reader's Encyclopedia" is over-due for a major facelift, it continues to be a valuable tool - I keep my copy at arms reach along with my copy of "Oxford Companion to American Literature", by James D. Hart.

I purchased this for myself my second year of college. Being an English major especially interested in the Modernists, it soon became the most used volume in my bookcase. A fantastic quick reference when crunched for time and excellent for understanding those oh-so-esoteric literary allusions. It's wonderful, with references for historical and artistic events and movements, novels, epics, authors, poets . . . a must for any lover and/or student of literature. This would make a fantastic gift, too!

Blue Monday is an interesting but not a compelling read. We never get inside Fat's head to understand the man, so we get an expanded discography. The dates, times and places seem to be well researched which begins to wear after a while. The matter of fact style just does not bring Fat's personal life into focus, although there are many descriptions of incedents about him. He remains a mystery in reference to his personal motivation, dual life style, and reclusive habits.
Russ H.

I guess if Antoine "Fats" Domino could keep the President and First Lady waiting, then he could keep us waiting for his first biography - this is a Natural Born book about a musical genius, intriquing personality, and unassuming cultural revolutionary.
The author tells his story and includes many entertaining anecdotes about life at home and on the road with several sets of support players - the greatest names of course being Dave Bartholomew, Herb Hardesty, and Lee Allen. We get a strong picture of the smiling, "safe" rock and roller, as the often defiant man's-man. And a complex artist/showman: he could sing The Rooster Song while flashing rings to make Freddie Blassie envious.
A great bunch of previously unpublished black and white photographs from Look magazine, among other handsome prints of lesser known shots really bolster the text.
A serious ommission for the audiophiles: not even a selected discography and no sessionography. [Though there are "Notes" in the back of the book on the mysterious Broadmoor recordings, including personnale and dates!]. Of course the '50s period sessions can be found as a booklet in the Bear Family 8-CD set, and in a European book, "Jazz Records"; also in a fairly recent issue of Goldmine magazine. But Fats Domino ABC-Paramount, Mercury, Broadmoor and Reprise FD session data has never, to my knowledge, appeared in print, and what a fabulous component that would have made.
Speaking of the ABC-Paramount tracks, the author did not mention in the text a very important 4-CD set, "The Paramount Years", which included the *incredibly* rare fourth l.p. for that label, plus the 1980 "If I Get Rich" from another record company!
The idea that "The Fat Man" is the first R & R record also doesn't agree with me. Yes, the elements are there, the upbeat shuffle and bright lead vocal, but that powerful sound (and many others by Fats in that '49 to '54 period) were not *primarily* for the youth. The first discs to be produced for teenage tastes came much later. I wouldn't even include "Tutti Frutti" in that category, as it too, lyrically and instrumentally echoed an earlier, "swingin'" sound. [It was "Ready Teddy" folks which screamed out...Rock and Roll!!!].
Still, this book should be "required reading" for those dedicated followers of those Rock and Roll Hall of Famers.

Rick Coleman's new book "Blue Monday" is the first full biography of Fats Domino. Many interesting things are therein.
- Fats was the first black rock & roll star. His records made the pop charts before r&r's dawn in 1955.
- Kids did not buy albums in the 50s, but Fats' albums sold, meaning he had an adult following like Louis Armstrong's.
- Fats concerts were often scenes of teenage riots. He may be known for `Blueberry Hill,' but his fierce rolling piano ignited his audience.
- "Blueberry Hill" was the product of a botched session. Engineer Bunny Robyn edited together the best parts of several incomplete takes and simply repeated the chorus.
- The string-laden "Walkin' To New Orleans" was a big breakthrough which traditionalists lamented. But it hit R&B (#2) even higher than pop (#6).
- Roy Brown once ditched a plan to have Fats open for him on tour. Fats never forgot it, and refused to have Brown open shows for him when the tables were turned.

Of the Big Five (EP, FD, CB, JLL, LR), Fats is the least lionized because he was not a "rebel." Historians normally embrace only people with bold lifestyles.

Boy ol Boy, Rick Coleman has written a great book on the TRUE story of Rock & Roll! I know as I was there and if you want to know what it was really like to be on the scene when true rock & roll was called race music on a juke box, Boogie Woogie and the down home blues was taking over the country then get this book and turn others on to it also. No one person was more responsible for the birth of R&R and R&B than the Fat Man! This was long before Elvis, Haley and the hand full of others came on the bandwagon. [...]

From his first record in 1949 until his harrowing escape from Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Antoine "Fats" Domino has defined New Orleans and its culture. This book puts Fats, his city, and his music into perspective in amazing detail. In the process, Rick Coleman convincingly demonstrates that Fats and his collaborators--especially songwriter/arranger Dave Bartholomew and producer Cosimo Matassa--have as solid a claim as Elvis, Carl, and Jerry Lee with Sam Phillips in Memphis or Wolf, Muddy, and Chuck with the Chess brothers in Chicago as the prime architects of rock 'n' roll. The product of more than 20 years of exhaustive research, this is, surprisingly, the first biography of one of the greatest early rock stars. Coleman had his work cut out for him; Fats is notoriously reclusive. Nevertheless, you come away from this book admiring Fats's talent and drive, and Coleman's exhaustive research and evocative writing. All the other great Louisiana rockers are here--the bayou wild men, backwoods musical savants, and forgotten honkers, shouters, string-benders, and drum-thumpers who helped create the Crescent City sound. I highly recommend this to anyone who wants to understand the real, complete history of rock 'n' roll instead of the revisionist pap that passes for such. -Mark Hoffman, co-author of "Moanin' at Midnight: The Life and Times of Howlin' Wolf"