Black and White Books

Thomas Sowell is a pretty smart guy. It's unfortunate that he wastes his skills on reinforcing peoples' existing political opinions. Much of what he says in this book is right, but the new ideas it offers don't seem like they ought to change the political opinions of anyone who has thought much about racial politics. And the old but wise arguments are written in a style that seems designed to turn off anyone who isn't already a fan of Sowell's ideas.
He presents interesting evidence that the culture of black ghettos came from parts of Britain that were uncivilized at the time its bearers moved to the southern U.S. This is the kind of subject where it's virtually impossible for most readers to tell whether he's being objective or selecting evidence to fit his biases. More importantly, it's hard to tell why it matters. Some people pay lip service to the authenticity of black culture, but I find it hard to believe that the origins of the culture several centuries ago plays an important role in peoples' choice to adopt the culture.
One interesting aspect of Sowell's story is that the large migration from the rural south to the urban north after WWII did not result in the usual assimilation of the migrants into the culture of the area they moved to. How much of that was due to the number of migrants, to their culture, or to their race? Sowell ignores this subject.
Sowell's argument that western civilization was responsible for the nearly worldwide abolition of slavery seems mostly right, but I'm disturbed by his exaggerations. He misleads readers into thinking that the first abolitionists were western, but a quick web search told me that Cyrus the Great wanted to abolish slavery worldwide two millennia earlier.
There are several places in the book where he makes confident, unsupported assertions as if they were certain, when I doubt anyone has enough evidence to make anything better than a rough guess. For instance, he thinks George Washington couldn't have gotten a prohibition on slavery into the constitution without driving the south out of the union (plausible, but it depends on hard-to-verify assumptions about his powers of persuasion), and that slavery would have lasted longer without the union (a controversial enough claim that abolitionists such as William Lloyd Garrison seemed to reject it, claiming the north would be a better haven for runaway slaves if it seceded and repealed the Fugitive Slave Law). There are probably some leftists who unfairly attack Washington for failing to accomplish more than he could possibly accomplish, but I don't see signs that they get respect from anyone who would listen to Sowell.
I'm quite suspicious of Sowell's claim that Hitler's pretenses of having been provoked into military action were intended only to fool people in Germany. Even if people in other countries had enough information to know Hitler was lying, it's easy to imagine that a fair number of them were looking for a way to rationalize neutrality, and that Hitler was helping them to fool themselves.

Sokoloff is trying to respond to my controversies and myths regarding employment and diversity. She addresses ideas that white men are "losing ground" and that black women are "doubly advantaged." She uses the census to ask whether professional jobs in the United States from 1960 to 1980 corroborate these ideas.

A big question that I had is whether or not this book is dated. I think it may be, but it is still useful in some ways. She wrote this when Bush the Father was in office. However, Bush the Son, too, tries to appease conservatives and Latinos and Blacks simultaneously on the affirmative action matter. She was writing at a time when the court case Bakke was seen as bad, now it is seen as a lifeboat for diversity. As long as Bush the Son, Donald Trump, and Rush Limbaugh can say all kinds of crazy, unfounded things about affirmative action, then this may be a good read, even 25 years after the last year of her study.

Sokoloff mentions black women and white women in the title because she wants to look at women in the workplace, but knows the position of black women is profoundly different from that of white women. As much as this is a human resources text, she really wants it to be available for women's studies majors. She makes the point of saying, "We can't study black women and white women in the workplace without thinking about the status of their male counterparts." Though a reasonable proposition, she covers these four race-gender groups equally. Why not say race and gender in the title rather than white women and black women?

The way Sokoloff divides occupations feels odd. She considers engineering and accounting "non-elite professions." I think most parents, regardless of race or class, would be delighted if their daughters or sons became engineers or accountants. They make bank! Her book comes before the computer industry had its bubble in the 1990s and burst in the current decade. She presents acceptable reasons for focusing on whites and blacks only. However, Asian Americans have radically altered the professional scene in the United States. Their absence from this discussion is sorely missed, to be honest.

Sokoloff is juggling so many balls here, that at first, it seems confusing. However, once you understand what she is saying, this reads incredibly quickly. Malveaux, for whom I don't particularly care, states that this book will only make you think about what's missing from it. I agree with that statement. However, dry census figures can't provide lush personal stories that many progressive readers would like. Still, I applaud Sokoloff for taking on this study.

I certainly don't feel that BLADE: BLACK AND WHITE is a must-have, as it costs the same as a Marvel Essential with only 1/4 of the page count. It's just a handful of random stories from throughout Blade's vampire-hunting career, unnecessarily reprinted on glossy paper. It's a nice supplement, however, for all the fans who have been going crazy over Marvel's thorough reprinting of Tomb of Dracula in the Essential format.

This book collects black and white material from VAMPIRE TALES #8-9, MARVEL PREVIEW #3 and #6, BLADE: CRESCENT CITY BLUES #1, and MARVEL SHADOWS AND LIGHT #1. For the most part, the stories are general Marvel horror fare: flimsy plots with lead characters who babble incessantly while fighting legions of the undead (and even remarking to themselves that they do it!). The Crescent City Blues story does improve on this a bit, even taking a dig at those earlier stories, but even this one runs low on steam towards the end. But still, as with any Marvel horror comic, the real star is the art, and BLADE: BLACK AND WHITE has impressive art galore: Tony deZuniga's textured fine-line, Jose Ladronn's weird Kirby/Giffen amalgam, and of course, the ultimate Dracula artist Gene Colan, who provides his always beautiful art for two stories, plus the cover. The work of Gene Colan is always worth the price of admission, but I'd say that this book is for TOD fans only.

If you plan to underline portions of Byron's work or comment in the margins of the text, avoid this edition as any ink "bleeds" through its poor quality paper (pencil works fine).

A Realm of Blood and Treachery

During the Druid War, Calastia's faithlessness almost brought disaster upon the Divine races. Today, under the despotic rule of King Virduk, the land of the Black Dragon once more threatens the peace and stability of the Scarred Lands. Greedy for land and power, Calastia has conquered or subverted all surrounding kingdoms. Virduk remains as cunning as ever, but now he is aided (some would say controlled) by his beautiful queen Geleeda who seems every bit as diabolical as her husband. Calastia: Throne of the Black Dragon shows exactly how formidable a foe this realm can be.

Compatible with 3rd Edition Rules

This book is as stated, a coloring book. I'd just add that it is child-oriented, meaning the drawings are mostly of children and the Charge of the Goddess poem has been paraphrased.

Several photos show famous views of classical Chicago sights (Lakefront, Chicago River), others are not so common, for example the "Seated Lincoln" monument in Grant Park. Quite disappointing to me are those pictures which show really ugly things like a parking lot or seating rows in a stadium; these photos should have been replaced by "classic" views.

The calender is nice in that the pictures show classic architecture in Chicago. The black and white photos are very nice in showing the architecture. The calender is filled with holidays and information to remind you of days coming up. The problem I have with the calender is that the photos do not show the architecture that Chicago is known for. The skyscrapers in the loop, the 'L' is missing, as well as the water tower. These are the places that define Chicago. Pictures of the Band shell in Millennium Park really need to be in color to appreciate the material of the structure. The places basically could have been better selected to put together not just a good calender but a great calender. As a calender overall it just average.

This book should be in every public library in the country, although on no photographer's personal bookshelf.
There is not a single image in this book which I would want to hang on my wall, yet the overall quality of the photographs is superb. It is the sort of work by dedicated photographic enthusiasts whose prints fill countless albums, envelopes, drawers, and old print paper boxes throughout the world.
The importance of the book lies more in its instructive value than in its aesthetic appeal. There are no illustrations of Ansel Adam's "Moonrise," or Karsh's "Churchill," to inspire young (or older) photographers to greatness. Nowhere else that I am aware is available to show the reality of how the plain, often simple images of ordinary events touching the photographer's life are where and how the study of the photographic art should proceed. Not as an end, but as a significant intermediate stage of learning.
For a photographer to achieve this level of vision would be more than most of us could ask for, to exceed it would be a blessing of great personal satisfaction.
There is even a chapter of really (unintentionally) bad landscape photographs at the end, to confirm that the path of improvement does not always lead upward. Even the title is a hoax. There are only two images taken in those important depression and war years between 1936 and 1950.
It is somewhat like a song with great, uplifting words, and an unsingable melody.

This collection of B&W photos promises a lot. Well-printed images fill each page. Baumann has chosen handsome models, generally twentyish, European in coloring, and general build. Still, individual differences hold the reader's interest - just look at the cover models.

But something lacks. Karsten's figure photography brings his models to life with senses of play and intimacy. Bitesnich asserts the sculptural, monumental qualities of human material. Boris Vallejo openly praises raw physical power in his photography. Other photographers explore a model's figure, personality, and life in many ways. But the models in this collection - well, they're just naked.

-- wiredweird