Kansas Books

I enjoyed this book very much. It takes one on an exciting journey through magical lands that come alive in this fantasy book. The characters in this book make it a delight. This book is a treasure, and anyone of any age would enjoy it.

The Wonderful Wizard of Oz The Kansas Centennial Edition By L. Frank Baum Illustrations by Michael McCurdy Foreword by Ray Bradbury ISBN 0-7006-0985-7, 600 Words

Dorothy and Toto are home again thanks to the University Press of Kansas' publication of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz: Kansas Centennial Edition. The wizards at the Press conceived of the edition after discovering that L. Frank Baum's book, first published in 1900, was in the public domain. The original print story about a little girl and her dog may be a surprise to Kansans familiar only with the classic 1939 film version of the Wizard of Oz. Even Judy Garland might be shocked by the new edition's black-and-white drawings by acclaimed children's book illustrator Michael McCurdy.

As a child during the 1960s, I remember watching the annual television broadcast of the Wizard of Oz. The scenes when the Wicked Witch sent the Winged Monkeys against Dorothy and her friends were so frightening that I would hide behind a chair. Now as an adult, I find some of McCurdy's illustrations equally unsettling, but rather than hide from them, the drawings compel me to examine and reflect upon Dorothy's journey, a journey that may be interpreted as one from innocence to knowledge.

The most provocative of McCurdy's twenty-five scratch board illustrations is the one in which Dorothy confronts the Witch. The witch has the pointed chin and bony fingers we expect from fairy tale witches, but her eye patch makes McCurdy's witch especially sinister. The Witch tricks Dorothy into giving her one of her Silver Shoes, (they are ruby slippers in the film version). With one foot bare, the angry Dorothy grabs the nearest object, a bucket of water, and throws it on the Witch. "...I never thought a little girl like you would ever be able to melt me and end my wicked deeds," wails the Witch.

W.W. Denslow illustrated the first Wizard of Oz book and his illustrations have remained popular. While Denslow's illustrations are charming and whimsical, they have none of the psychological interest of McCurdy's. As unusual as McCurdy's artwork, is the new edition's forward by science fiction and fantasy author Ray Bradbury. Bradbury contrasts the Wonderful Wizard of Oz with Lewis Carrol's Alice in Wonderland.

Bradbury writes, "...Lewis Carroll's cast of characters would have died here of saccharine or run back to hide behind the cold Glass. Baum settled in, delighted with bright nothings. If the Wicked Witch is truly dead it is because L. Frank Baum landed on her with his Boy's-Life-Forever-Sunkist philosophy. No witch could survive Baum, even today when witches beam themselves up."

A criterion for literature to be considered classic is its ability to be reinterpreted over time. In 1964, Henry Littlefield wrote an article in the American Quarterly entitled, "The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism." Littlefield suggests Baum's book is an allegory for the Populist politics of the 1890s in which "led by naïve innocence and goodwill, the farmer, laborer and the politician approach the mystic holder of national power and ask for personal fulfillment."

Baum was aware that a story holds different meanings for different ages. In the forward to the original Oz, Baum notes that most horrible characters and disagreeable incidents have been eliminated from modern fairy tales. "Having this thought in mind, the story... was written solely to please children of today. It aspires to be a modernized fairy tale, in which wonderment and joy are retained and the heartaches and nightmares are left out."

One-hundred years after its initial publication, the children's classic The Wonderful Wizard of Oz by L. Frank Baum remains worthy of reading by every Kansan regardless of age. However, in Michael McCurdy's illustrations, adults may find new meaning for an old children's story.

Paul Hawkins is regional librarian for the South Central Kansas Library System.

The author is a typical leftist; that is, he was a rich kid brought up in a Lilly-white suburb whose politics swung to the left when he didn't automatically inherit the social-standing he assumed was his birthright. This mindset deludes him into thinking that he has some sort of common-cause with the working-class he spent his early years avoiding like the plague. Franks' thesis is that populist demagoguery is only acceptable when serving the purposes of socialism,rather then corporate-conservatism...the possibility that populism itself isn't such a hot idea ain't even on the table.
Obama basically said the same thing with his "guns and religion" gaffe, but at least he didn't repeat himself until he had enough pages for a book. One of the log-rolling blurbs on the cover calls Frank "the second-coming of H.L. Mencken, but with better politics". Wrong on both counts. If you need a laugh at the fumbling of Marxists trying to convert Bubbas to their cause without having to actually interact with them, this is the fish-wrap for you!

This book is a must read for anyone wanting to understand today's politics and the great backlash occurring among good people who have been "tricked" into believing that voting "conservative" will somehow help and protect them. How far from the truth! I urge you to read this book. I highly recommend it.

Author Thomas Frank takes a funny, insightful 2005 look at politics in Kansas (and the USA). Frank shows how cultural wedge issues (abortion, gun control, etc.) have more pull with Kansans than economic ones. Most Kansas farmers and workers have fallen behind in wages, benefits, etc., yet see millionaire George W. Bush as their pal, even as he cuts their subsidies, busts their unions, and lowers taxes for their rich bosses. These Kansans often blame liberals for their problems - even with Republicans controlling government. Frank also shows how Kansas conservatives foolishly vent anger at wealthy moderate Republicans from suburban Kansas City by cutting their taxes! Of course, this is Kansas, which hasn't voted Democratic for U.S. Senate since 1932, nor for President (except in 1964) since 1936.

This book is fun reading, but the author jumps around too much, and wrongly faults free trade and Bill Clinton's middle-class strategy. He also can't see why blabbering idiots like Rush Limbaugh influence many, or why McGovern-liberalism (busing, racial quota's, etc.) still hurts Democrats at the polls. Despite these flaws, this readable look at U.S. politics is mostly on-target.

It is hard to know just how to process "What's the Matter with Kansas." The writer, Kansas emigre Thomas Frank, clearly feels that both major parties are now beyond the pale, or to be more specific, that at some point in the future Democrats will be moderate Republicans (if they aren't already). Invert this statement, and it probably explains Barack Obama's victory in the Kansas Democratic primary as well as Mike Huckabee's victory in the state's Republican primary: former Republicans, appalled by how far to the right their party has moved, surged for Obama while conceding their former party to the forces of reaction. Frank refers (unfortunately just once) to conservative pundit Andrew Sullivan, now an enthusiastic Obama backer for the same reason. A debate between Sullivan and Frank would, I am sure, shed more light than this book does on the future of American politics.

While Chapter Five ("Con Men versus Mod Squad") illustrates that the heat of battle within the Republican party of Kansas now exceeds that between it and Kansas Democrats, Frank insists that while prosperous Kansans may be losing the battle for elective office, they are winning the much more important battle for economic policy. The economic elite of the state, as in the United States as a whole, is garnering an ever-larger share of the pie while the middle class stagnates and the working class goes into freefall. What seems hard to understand at first blush is the determination of the working class to continue the policies (pushed by Republicans, but increasingly embraced by Democrats as well) which have brought about this situation.

Frank's analysis of how conservatives have managed to create what he calls the "backlash" worldview (a term he borrows from Susan Faludi) against not only feminism, but such other contemporary realities as sex on television and such myths as an attack on the right to self-defense, is largely on target. This elevates those issues above economic ones despite the fact that things like the rate of taxation can be changed by simple legislation while things like legal abortion would require a Constitutional amendment and are therefore probably permanently out of reach. Frank makes a convincing case that economics have in fact driven at least the changes in the culture industry (the same sex and violence that makes American movies fodder for the right wing makes them the best selling in the global marketplace) and refers not unsympathetically to the coarseness of our popular culture.

Nostalgia for the New Deal, the last time Kansas was represented in the U. S. Senate by a Democrat, largely drives this book. The next to last page begins with a discussion of how the features of Kansas City recommended to visitors in the 1939 WPA guide to the city largely no longer exist. More to the point Frank refers in places to the New Deal coalition as if it could somehow be resurrected (presumably by blowing up the headquarters of Fox News, whose octupus-like media and pseudo-intellectual arms Frank rails against constantly).

My own position is that the New Deal is the past. It inaugurated the Fifth Party System, which was replaced by the Sixth Party System starting in 1968 with Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy and culminating in the 2001 inauguration of President Bush, when Republicans were in control of all three branches for the first time since 1954. In the 2008 election we have a chance to create a Seventh Party System in which Democrats will have the initiative for another 36 to 40 years; but it will not be based on the same coalitions as the Fifth. This is what Bill Clinton was trying to do (not quite as consciously as Karl Rove's mirror image project) with his presidency in the 1990s.

Frank invites the reader to conclude that Clinton's entire economic agenda was almost equally disastrous (especially for rural America) as that of Ronald Reagan. I am not convinced. According to the 2008 World Almanac (which being a strict reference work draws no conclusions about why this happened), by 1990, things had gotten so bad for four states -- Iowa, North Dakota, West Virginia, and Wyoming -- plus the District of Columbia, that they experienced absolute population declines during the 1980's. In the 1990's this trend was reversed except in the District of Columbia, and there, it can largely be explained by a combination of the shrinking Federal government and white flight, for which I suppose President Clinton did bear some responsibility. Of course, in 2004 all four of those states voted Republican, as did three of them in 2000. My suspicion is that the 2010 census will reveal the same phenomenon (possibly in a larger number of heartland states) this decade as in the 1980's, but North Dakota and Wyoming will still fail to vote Democratic, at least this year.

This book makes the case that social conservatives undermine their positions when they join with the economic conservatives; and that the evils they see in so-called liberalism are largely imaginary, at least in comparison to what they get when they cater to the interests of Wall Street. It is a rather entertaining book from the point of view of partisan politics. It takes on some of shrillest voices of the far right with a good deal of aplomb and insight. But far more interesting is the survey of Kansas, it's players and it's contradictory history. There is a strong sense of irony that builds as this story unfolds about the politics of this one part of the American heartland.

Merely from observing some of the recent excesses of Wall Street - whether it be the gross inflating of stock values during the internet bubble or the extreme leveraging during the current subprime mortgage mess - it is tempting to conclude that the liberal elite is not responsible for all the problems. Then, take a look at the desolation that the author describes of the Kansas Main Street, where only a thrift store or two remain, and contrast that to the huge mansions - occupied by powerful middlemen and ex-CEOs - in the suburbs of Mission Hills. The small Kansas farmer can't compete, hampered in the free market, as he has always been, by the whims of weather or the unpredictability of supply. On the other hand, the big corporate operations such as the meatpackers in western Kansas - which exploit cheap immigrant labor, drain the aquifer, and ultimately wreck havoc on the environment and social structure - are what thrive now in the state.

It does not make much sense in response to the excesses of Wall Street - which have resulted in an ever deepening gulf between rich and poor - to clamour for more of the same: the lowering of taxes especially for the rich, privatizing profits while socializing risk, and deregulating or not-regulating financial markets to the point where complex financial instruments run amok. Yet, that is exactly the kind of affirmation of Wall Street's ways that the social conservatives advocate in their politics.

The author explains that the conservative backlash is not focused on economics; that it's basis is cultural, and focuses on a battleground between the true Americans, who are authentic and moral, and the liberals, who are inauthentic and amoral. Somehow, the social conservatives do not make the connection between corporate business decisions - which are largely motivated by the Wall Street priority of maximizing profit - and all that is wrought as a result of these decisions. Instead of railing about what results from the crassness of corporate advertising, the endless promotion of consumerism, using the news as entertainment, they prefer to rail against the liberals,

I suppose it comes down to the need to stake a claim of moral authority in the face of feeling powerless in a changing world. The great source of that authority is to be found in the old time religion, notably Biblical mythology.The fact that this mythology conflicts with reason and scientific inquiry - as in the dispute between creationism and evolution - is not a problem for true believers. Reason doesn't seem very important in comparison to ingrained, traditional beliefs.

Another high five for Douglas Preston and Lincoln Child and the engaging and fantastic Agent Pendergast. I just couldn't put the book down. An excellent read.

Having been a fan of Preston/Child books since day 1 I expected nothing less from them than a solid read, great suspense, good character developement and an enjoyable ride. I got all of that until the last 20-30 pages. Let's just say that the ending left a LOT of room for improvement. Not only did the ending feel rushed but it was also implausible. Here's a good trick for you to do. Read all but the ending and you'll get a classic Preston/Child book and then make up your own ending. I promise you that your's will be better than theirs was. Then read their ending and you'll see what I mean.

awesome book!! actually gave me goosebumps. writing was so vivid i could really put myself into the story. Pendergrast is so cool in every situation I actually found myself talking to him telling him to hurry up! Douglas Preston and Lincoln Child are a force to be reckoned with and I am an avid ,and to say the least, picky reader. So turn out the lights, put your back to a wall and enjoy.

Although A little slower than some of their books, if you enjoy Thrillers and Suspense, you won't be disappointed.

This is not the best of the 4 Pendergast novels I have read. Having said that, it is still superior to 90% of the thrillers out there today. Putting Pendergast out in the prairies rather than NYC was an interesting change. The thrills and chills are definitely there, I just think the story was OK and not great like Cabinet of Curiousities. Overall, I would recommend it, but not over the first 3 books in the series.

I found this book and the rest of the series in the Young Adult section and I'm surprised how much I loved all of them. I think Ann Brashares did a most wonderful job of ending the series and tying up all the loose ends. It seems sad to say goodbye to "The Septembers" ... they became real friends during the journey of the Pants. My favorite character seemed to change in each book as the girls matured and lived life. Carmen remains my favorite since I think she stayed true to herself throughout. Someday, I'll read it again.

Let me just start out saying that I loved this book! It exposed human nature and thought unlike a lot of books I have read. I can relate to a lot of their thoughts and insecurities, and this comforted me. Also, it was full of surprises--a few predictable ones, but a few not so predictable.

I was sad from the beginning that Win (Carmen's love interest in the 3rd one) was not in this book-but at the same time I appreciated that. Life is never going to work out perfectly, so I am thankful the book was somewhat realistic. It also allowed you to see Carmen down and depressed and not confident and out-spoken anymore. If things had worked out between Carmen and Win, then Carmen would not have been so lonely without any of her friends. However, the whole way through I was hoping she would call Win or something because I just loved him.

I also didn't really like the whole Bridget making out with a married man, but hey, she discovered herself through that and something she needed to change about herself. I loved the stuff with her and her family at the end...that was really important!

Lena and Kostos sort of being together at the end made me happy, and I really appreciated the points Ann Brashares made through this that their love fell apart and was somewhat imaginary because you can't love each other when you are trying to be perfect. You have to learn to love the imperfections and relax and show your own imperfections to each other. Both of them had to learn to not be people-pleasers.

I really appreciated what happened between Tibby and Brian. Oftentimes, couples don't realize how sex changes your relationship. However, I do wish that at least one of the girls could have head a steady relationship through the novel, but that would probably be too boring haha.

Anyways, I couldn't put this book down and read it all in 2 days even though I was soooo busy! I am sad the series is over, but at the same time, it was able to end on a good note and really expose human nature!

Most teenage girls can relate to the Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants series. My niece loved them as a birthday gift at age 14 (prior to the movie), and I just had 4 girls from my neighborhood, ages 12 and 13 read
the books I had now ordered. They read them in record time, passing them around and declared them "great". It's refreshing to see youngsters reading, and as a former teacher, I keep a reasonably well stocked library to lend to young friends.

I read this book in a matter of days....I was hooked! I could not put it down. The books definitely brought flashbacks of my teenage yrs. Going through the struggles of being a teen with love, school, friends...etc.

As far as the disappointment, I was kind of sad that the Lena/Kostos story was not really wrapped up...just kind of leaves the reader hanging. They were probably my favorite characters. I really wanted to find out if they would ever get a chance to be together. After all they've been through together and apart. I guess this is why the author left it open to the reader to speculate.

I did like the fact that in the end the girls figured out they didn't need the pants to keep the bonded together, it was the strength of their friendship that kept them together.

Overall, it was a good book. I wish the series would've continued at least through their college yrs. I hate to see it end but I guess as they say all good things have to come to an end.

This book is definitely the most disappointing of the series. I thought it would be as good as books 1-3, but no.

The writing was average and the plot was average. For a Great Depression book, the story didn't seem realistic. The attempted rape and rescue seemed unrealistic. The adoption seemed off. The story's ending was not believable.

During a horrible drought in 1930's Kansas, a circle of women friends forge a friendship of unflinching trust and strength in solidarity.

They help each other through difficult times and guard each other's secrets with incredible care and a devoted, loyal unity.

When a new member, Rita, joins in the circle, some of the tight knit threads become intimately tested. Rita is a city girl unaccustomed to the country life and doesn't quite fit in with the `Persian Pickles' or understand their ways.

The women gather to talk and share their love of quilting, as the dry Kansas soil leaves their town barren with burning crops and little work or food.
Life is hardscrabble and heavy handed.....but secrets must be sheltered...even as evidence of a murder is uncovered on one of the farms.

Good selection for women's book clubs, as the book offers up some important moral and social themes for discussion.

Wewouts Book Club, February 24, 2007. This book had a "Fried Green Tomatoes, Whistle Stop" feel to it for me. A great book in how friends, true friends, will keep their mouths shut and not gossip about anything bad. A good book to read about the bonds of true friendship.

This isn't a book I would probably have picked up, but it was assigned as a group read. It was a very fast read and I was hooked early on. I finished it in no time and absolutely LOVED IT!!

An 5- book, now that I think of it. Place: Dust bowl Kansas in the 30s. The women get together to sew. Friends you'd die for in the lonely and hard farm country in deep economic depression. Characters wonderfully present. And look at some of these names! Rita and Agnes Ritter, Mrs. Septima Judd, hushand Prosper, Opalina Dux, Ada June Zinn - husband Buck, Ceres Root, Ella Crook,Ben Crook, Nettie Burgett,husband Tyrone, Forest Ann, hill drifters Massie (Zepha, Blue, son Sonny and Baby). Hiawatha the hired hand. -
Queenie Bean tells the story of friendship, mystery, and loyalty that beats all.

Best book I've ever read, and I've read a lot of books. I suggest watching the movie first if you plan on watching it because the book is 10 times better and the movie would be a disapointment. I'm making the movie sound like it sucks, it doesn't, they are both absolutely wonderful. But a lot was left out in the film. Scott Heim is a mastermind and I'm looking forward to reading his other books.

Read Mysterious Skin if you would like an addicting, disturbing, descriptive, absolutely the best book you've ever read, kind of thing.
once again I will say... *watch the movie FIRST*

I know the authors father and had to read this.
It has the local of my hometown and deals with
abuses and lifes troubles very well.

I'm usually not one to claim that the movie was better, but in the case of Mysterious Skin, I have to say it. The book was beyond shock; it was tasteless at some parts. The movie had an exceptional way of limiting the sexuality and still giving you that same shocking experience. I felt that the book had an awkward timeline and I simply had no appeal to any of the characters. However, the story itself is a heartbreaking one and if you are a big fan of the movie, I would suggest the book anyway.

I had been doing some research on child sexual abuse for my upcoming novel, and came across this book as a cross-reference on how things are in today's world. I read the book in one sitting. Very well-written, full of escapades and scary times in the lives of two boys marred by sexual abuse. One lad is so traumatized he believes aliens are responsible, as some 5 hours disappear from his life. The other lad gives in to child prostituion, but somehow survives. That the two meet to talk about a dark day from their past is unique, and Scott Heim tells it the only way he knows how: with grace and aplomb. Some of the scenes are not for the faint-hearted as adult themes run the course from alcoholism and drug addiction to cruising behavior and the gay lifestyle in small town America. I would have liked to have seen more dialogue in the novel that wasn't so staticky. Other than that, a first-rate novel from a powerful writer. You may also want to rent or buy the movie version as well, as there are strong performances by some great actors. But read the book first, then see the film. This upcoming author has much to say in our difficult times.

Scott Heim, Mysterious Skin (Harper, 1995)

My review of this book, which I warn you now is going to be ambivalent as all get-out, hinges on one question to which I do not, and likely never will, know the answer: did Scott Heim mean the big reveal at the end to be a big reveal, or did he intend we know the answer to Brian Lackey's question all along? If the former, the book is an utter failure in every sense of the word. If the latter-- which Publisher's Weekly seems to assume, since the big reveal has its dustcover whisked off in the first few sentences of their treatment of the ("impressive"; Library Journal concurs with "powerful") book.

Brian Lackey, at the age of eight, is coming home from a Little League game one night. One minute he's at the game; the next, he's curled up in the crawlspace of his house, nose gushing blood, and five hours of his life is missing. Brian becomes convinced that aliens abducted him during the missing time, and sets off to find corroboration of this. Brian's story, however, is not the only one we're told. Neil McCormick is a teenage hustler who plays on the same little league team as Brian, and is being molested by the team coach; these two form the core of the narrative, with other chapters from the points of view of some of the other characters in the story (Neil's friends, Brian's sister, et al.).

You know, Library Journal spoils the end, too, so I don't feel terribly awful about doing it. If the pros are at it, why not me? In any case, I find it somewhat difficult to believe that anyone could get more than thirty pages into this book without realizing that Brian's search for aliens is a red herring, and that Brian, too, was molested by his little league coach. It's not as if Heim isn't broadcasting it in three-foot-high neon letters throughout. But, as I said before, did he mean to? If so, this becomes not a bad freshman effort. A bit badly-paced, perhaps, but well-written, with a band of interesting characters who have enough neuroses to keep the staff of a good-sized asylum on constant alert. If not, Heim has a great, great deal to learn about the art of foreshadowing. I tend to give him the benefit of the doubt, thinking no one could miss it, but then people are surprised by the endings of Jodi Picoult novels all the time. In any case, if the subject matter doesn't squick you out-- or perhaps more importantly if it does-- this is one you might want to consider picking up. ***

This book is truly good: well-researched and fascinating and the battle descriptions are quite engaging; not an easy thing for most to do. I find faults with this book, though:

1--The writers go into great detail about what Zhukov did in his preparations for Kursk and how the battle went along. This is all written very well and is exciting, BUT...one thing is sorely missing: ANY mention of the fact that Zhukov (whom the writers have no shortage of accolades for, though they do speak of his defeats in Operation Mars and at the Seelow Heights) KNEW exactly what the Germans were going to do and where they were going to do it because they were getting information from the Lucy Ring, which was supposedly a bunch of disgruntled German officers but most likely was the Brits way of getting their Enigma intel to the Soviets. Any idiot can create a good defense when he's given the other side's playbook denoting EVERYTHING that the enemy is going to do. I was very surprised and upset not to see any mention of this VERY IMPORTANT fact.

2--On page 275, the authors--in the context of the happenings of the `Second Period of War (Nov. '42--Dec. '43)--say, `...the Red Army destroyed Blitzkrieg as a viable offensive military concept'. Apparently the writers had their heads in the sand during the two Gulf Wars because BOTH Coalition Forces commanders--General H. Norman Schwarzkopf and General Tommy Ray Franks--used Blitzkrieg-style tactics to defeat Saddam Hussein's forces. Blitzkrieg works and, more interestingly, the way the writers describe the Soviets tactics during their drive into Central Europe VERY much shows them to echo the tactics of the afore mentioned unviable Blitzkrieg. Odd.

3--My third and final problem with the book is that they answer the question of `Who defeated Germany?' with the only answer possible after looking through the information in this book: it was the Soviets who beat Germany. The only problem is--THIS IS WRONG!!! The Soviets DID NOT defeat Germany; America, Briton AND the USSR defeated Germany. Not a single one of them could have defeated Germany on their own. America needed the UK as a place to launch the attack, Briton would have been starved into submission if it wasn't for the US getting food and supplies to them across the Atlantic and the USSR not only needed the aid it got from the US, as well, but, even though it did fight the majority of German divisions, the Germans had to worry about not only the Soviets but also Briton and later America. If Germany did not have to expend its already limited resources against these two foes, as well, things might have been different. The writers also say that the Russians would have defeated Germany regardless of D-day happening: I can't think of a more ridiculous statement in this book. D-day and the Germans preparations for it tied up a large amount of forces (and Rommel) which could have had a definite impact on the Ostfront. The fact that Stalin was continually urging the Allies to open a second front I think lends credence to this.

The authors also say that Hitler's interference with his generals in the field was not as important as it was eventually made out to be and that it was basically a convenient excuse for the German failure. This is untrue; Hitler did the WORST thing to the generals in the field with his orders: he prevented them from using the very revolutionary tactics that had not only brought them success in the beginning of the war, but were being used AGAINST them by ALL of their enemies.

I do think that this is a book worth getting; the wealth of information on the Soviet struggle is worth it alone, but there are just some things to look out for. This could have been a great book, but the writers, as is usual with many books on this topic, have found their niche and are going to play it up.

This book should be the first book those interested in WW2 history should pick up. The very basic truths of the war are clearly presented: 1.The Soviets beat the Germans basically- the Western Allies fought about 1/4 of the war in Europe; 2. the Soviets learned as the war dragged on- staring from a 20-1 Soviet/German kill ratio we end up with a 1.5/1 ratio- respectable for an offensive army (explaining also the mythical German 5 or 10 to one kill ratio of some reviews); 3. Stalin meddled less with his generals as the war dragged on- Hitler meddled more with bad results; 4. the Soviets took blitzkrieg to a new level and by the end of the war were superior in tank breakthroughs and encirclements; 5. the Red Army was the best land army in the world by the end of the war- combining intelligence and tactics with a brutal trajectory toward any goal.
The book may come across as being very pro-Soviet but that is only because of the literally thousands of tomes about the Western Allies and the German Army which give short shrift to the Soviets- when actual Soviet achievements are exposed they cannot help but look better than we're used to thinking. My only criticism of this book is in the department of statistics- I think it tends to exaggerate Soviet casualties and the numbers given on tables aren't consistent throughout the book. Still- the best basic primer on WW2.

I have read the other reviews and I would also agree that this Book supplies you with all the facts , most of them I have not read in other places. However I would recommend this book only for academics or collector of hard facts. This book is more of a text book than interesting read. Nothing against the book. But this is not the kind of treatment I was looking for, just miles and miles of yarns of facts.

I like all stories to have some emotion and some human face. Even war stories. The battle of Stalingrad is dealt with in 2 pages, everything cut down to basic dry facts. In fact I think wikipedia article on battle of stalingrad does a better job. So make your choice based on what you are looking for.

This is an excellent book of the Soviet struggle against the German invasion in WW2. The book has oustanding references and well researched. The maps and tables provide excellent information to reinforce their description over the 3 stages of war fought in the Soviet Union.

What stands out the most is the Stalin's initial paranoia and purge of the Soviet military in the late 1930's that led to their disasters in 1941 that was later changed to Stalin's ceding of power and trust to a select few Field Marshalls. In comparison, Hitler's delegation of authority led to initial German success, but later growing paranoia and micromanagement led to multiple disasters and complete defeat as he fired his best Field Marshalls when they refused to follow his commands that would result in the senseless deaths of thousands of German soldiers.

The book describes on how the Soviets decided to form Guards and Shock Armies to mass their best fighting soldiers, artillery, and majority of their tanks to maximize offensive combat power as the war progressed. Meanwhile, ineptly managed by Hitler, the front line and experienced German Panzer units could not receive replacement tanks to maintain their combat strength. Instead, raw green units were formed and sent piecemeal to block massed and experienced Soviet formations. History definitely shows which method of leadership and delegation of authority by a country's ruler can lead to victory.

The Soviet Union endured five bloody years of war and millions of casualties so that the United States could mobilize and train our soldiers to fight and win against the Germans. Towards the end of WW2, the United States was running out of front line infantry replacements and many units were becoming war weary (read a Band of Brothers regarding the 101st Airborne Division) after two years of combat. How both the German and Soviet armies were able to endure such massive losses and still have the ability to mobilize and sustain combat formations until the brink of annihilation is testament to the bravery of those who served and sacrificed for their nation regardless of who their political leaders were.

The Soviets adapted and refined their tactics and strategy that utilized their strengths to overwhelm the Germans at the point of attack. The Germans declined in strength and only had limited, but very high quality, formations and equipment that could have won if under the proper command and leadership.

Would be very interesting if the authors decided to write a hypothetical book comparing if Patton fought against the Soviets in 1946. Good book to include in a collection.

This book presents a lot of tactical detail. E.g., Unit A was reorganized and attacked the left flank of Unit B in the early morning of XYZ. It works neither on the human nor the strategic levels. Moreover, the authors seem rather approving of Stalin. E.g., they switch back and forth from calling "Dictator" and "Premier". The latter seems a stretch in anyone's lexicon.

This book started out in similar fashion to the original Cat in the Hat book, but then it turned ugly and a little disturbing.

Once again, the children are left alone, this time responsible for shoveling snow while the mother goes into town. The Cat in the Hat shows up and invites himself in the house, where he makes himself at home by eating cake in the bathtub. When he exits the tub, there is a pink ring that needs to be cleaned up. The cat uses various objects and surfaces in the house to clean the ring, but it eventually winds up outside in the snow.

The Cat enlists the help of other cats that are under his hat to "kill the mess", using pop guns. The more the cats shoot, the more the spots spread. There's an illustration of pink-tinged snow covering the ground, the house, and even a snowman. This picture, coupled with the words "Kill those spots! Kill the mess!", just comes across as a little violent and gory to me.

Just plain weird story. Not a favorite of mine, by any means.

Review by Sherry North, Author, Because You Are My Baby

As a child, I liked The Cat in the Hat Comes Back better than the original. Now my 4-year-old son agrees. He can't get enough of this absurd tale of a bathtub ring that ends up all over the house and yard. The story's imagination is breathtaking, as the cat in the hat reveals 26 more cats in hats atop his head. There's educational value, too, because the 26 little cats are named each letter of the alphabet. The final solution at the end of the story is a bit vague and abrupt, but otherwise it's a fun-filled romp both kids and parents enjoy.

The feline in the big long red and white striped top hat is back again, with his subversive, mischievous ways.

The two kids are bored and doing the crappy yardwork thiing, and with the parental units away, the cat wants to play. Crazy snow stunts, games and fights and dodgy bathroom antics are more fun than works.

This book deserves 5 stars.It is the best Dr.Seuss book I have ever read!It has lots of odd and fun things and uses lots of ryhming.It takes you beyond imagination.I really recomend this book to you.

The Cat In The Hat Comes Back (beginner books) is a great book for children just learning to read. The child is introduced to words that rhyme and the letters of the alphabet. The focus is clearly on children since the entire short story takes place while two young children are left at home while their mother goes "to the town." Moreover, the illustrations are wonderful.

The action begins when the two kids, one boy and one girl, are shoveling snow while their mother runs errands. Naturally, The Cat In The Hat returns to do more mischief and, quite conveniently, set up a story that teaches children the alphabet and rhyming words. After the cat makes a mess in the bathtub we are introduced to all his little helpers who are named from A to Z--great alphabet lesson! The story is made amusing for small children because the pink mess in the tub goes to their mother's dress, the wall and eventually all the snow outside! It's a silly premise; but it'll work for young children just learning to read. They'll like the humor of this.

Of course, Seuss also inserts plenty of words to teach children more vocabulary. Children are introduced to words like cold and warm, fun and done, dig and pig, news and shoes, whose and news--and more! Excellent!

I cannot help but notice that some people felt that the use of guns in the story (they help take away the pink snow mess) might lead children to conclude that guns are "OK." Unfortunately, these people have a good point. Dr. Seuss could have and should have used another method instead of guns to clean away the pink snow mess. I will take off one star for this: I would take off more but the rest of the book is so thoughtfully done that I can't go lower on my rating.

Overall, I recommend The Cat In The Hat Comes Back for parents to use as a tool to help very young children learn to read. The kids will love it; and hopefully some fond memories will be made when you sit down and read this with your children. I also recommend that you mention that guns are bad and maybe add that the guns in this book were special in that they couldn't hurt anybody.

All in all, great job, Dr. Seuss!

Promotion of the generals in the Civil War was not any different than promotions are today in the military, government, business, and the rest of the world. You will find that in Grant's and Lee's armies there were many generals passed over because of some conflict with those of higher rank. The men they touted for promotions were not always the best to fill a leadership position. Some may have been very brave soldiers but not a leader. Through out the war there were some wrong men giving the orders, orders misunderstood, changed, not carried out, and the wrong order given. Maybe some battles could have been changed and had fewer casualties, but not the outcome of the war. Franklin was the most tragic battle of our Civil War. By Ruth Thompson author of "The Bluegrass Dream" and "Natchez Above The River"

Writing as a Small BusinessQualifying Laps: A Brewster County NovelSins of the Fathers: A Brewster County NovelTravelersThe Bluegrass Dream: A Wilderness Adventure of Early Settlers

In The Confederacy's Last Hurrah, Wiley Sword covers political intrigue, strategy and tactics, and the view from the trenches equally well. My great-great grandfather fought at Franklin and Nashville, and through Sword's work, I was able to observe, from the safety of my living room, the agony, terror, carnage, and unbelievable courage of the men on both sides. He has thoroughly researched Hood's campaign through Tennessee, yet manages not to lose the reader in details. Maps are clear and easy to follow. I recommend this book wholeheartedly to anyone wanting a better understanding of the war's final days in the West.

I am a young civil war enthusist and have never really studied the end of the Confederate Army of the Tennessee. This book opens the door into one of the saddest few months of any army during the Civil War. Very in depth and throughly reserched. Spends ample time on the decisive Battle of Franklin and incorprates not only the eyewitness accounts from officers, but the privates in the thick of the fight. Recommened for any Civil War enthusist.

Some people who have read this book with a jaundiced eye have criticized Sword for his accurate protrayal of John Bell Hood. Davis like the present president had favorites to whom he remained faithful despite their obvious shortcommings. As Sword points out Hood was a great general as a field commander but even before his physical injuries he was not suited to command an independent army. As radical Confederate Louis Wigfall commented, "Davis has attempted to do what God couldn't; male John Hood a general." If someone wants to understand the imprortance of the West and the disaster made by Hood, this book is required reading. It is not recommended for hero worshipers.

Outstanding account of battles during Hoods "invasion" of Tennessee in late 1864. The narrative is first rate. The descriptions of the principal characters both blue and gray were extremly interesting and given due credit.
The descriptions of the tremendous blood-letting of Hood's decision to ram the Army of Tennessee up against prepared breastworks at Franklin are chilling. The destruction of a proud army was guaranteed even without their eventual defeat by Gen. George Thomas at Nashville two weeks later. The author describes thoroughly the pre-lude to Franklin as Hood lets a vast chunk of the Union Army slip through his grasp at Spring Hill. This lost opportunity sets the stage for the Army of Tennessee's destruction days later at Franklin with fruitless head on attacks. A fast and detailed read.
Living in Tennessee, I was able to walk some of the ground described in the book and picture what it might have been. The author has done a very good job of providing geographical details and descriptions. The Last Hurrah of a Lost Cause

This is an interesting book for neo-pagans and occultists alike.I really enjoyed the book.Aside from a few problems with the writing,it's a worthwhile book.What i did not like about the book,the authoress removes herself from the people she writes about.If she wasn't interested in them,why write the book?There's lots of tidbits of witchy information.A lot of interesting magickal people discussed.The neo-gothic vampires seem to be hung up on the darkside of christianity.The earth-based witches seem to be in tune with the cycles of the seasons.The witch's covens bond the 'besom buddies' together. It's one of the best true occult story-books that reveals the lives of some rather unique supernatural worshippers.The book's price has dropped recently.I think every serious minded occultist, would be simply nonchalant about the book's talebearing material however.The authoress lumps all these occultists ,from various paths, into one general-themed book.Yet,this book may inspire curious readers to follow the more natural,or even the more supernatural, path less taken thesedays.

Book Summary:
This was a pretty interesting book that takes a look at those who practice the "other" religion/belief systems out there. The author takes a respectful look at those who consider themselves werewolves, elfs, magicans, vampires and other magically inclined creatures. While doing research for this book the author is forced to consider her notions of what is good and evil, what is right and wrong and whether or not these people have a few gears lose. What she finds is quite simply that if one thinks like they do then they are not crazy. Some just look at the world differently, some where raised with the traditions/beliefs that they follow and some became so disillusioned / fed up with life that the only way they could survive was to find the magic in life by becoming something else. Mostly these people are the people we deal with everyday whether at work or the neighbor across the street that always looks a little pale. Whether you belive in magic or not this book does have interesting information on various belief systems and how some of those systems came to be. Maybe the most important thing that the author touches on is that most of the misunderstandings that happen come from a lack of cultural understanding. Mostly this is touched on in the chapters on Hoodoo. The author makes the point that instead of over reacting to everything it may (is usually) be a better idea to do some research and go listen to what the pepole involved have to say. Something that can't be stressed enough in the era of talking heads that condem anything that isn't considered mainstream(ex:currently video games). As the author points out near the end of this book one may not be able to fit what someone else belives into their view of the world but it never hurts to be opened minded. To paraphrase an old story would you rather stay in the hole you fell in or let the psi vampire/werewolf/magican/wizard/elf/magic worker help you out?
------
This is not a book that is in the vein of ghost stories. What I mean is that there are no stories that deal with one incident and then move on to the next. This is more of what the author experienced as she research information for the book. This book is basically a primer guide on some of the belief systems that have gotten attention over the last few years, but not the one's that have gotten the most attention such as Wicca, off shoots of major religons and ghost hunting. This book is also written by a former religious reporter that has her own solid belief system that is somtimes challenged by what she sees. The emphasis is on reporter (which the author admits) so she wants proof, which in most cases is hard to come by since what is experienced is dependent on what one felt. I would recommend this to anyone who is interested in the subject matter but doesn't want anything that dives too deep or is too serious.

I thought this book was good, but not great. I think the only reason I did not give this book a higher rating is because this author almost totally dismissed Wicca, the Strega, Slavic Sorcery & Shamanism, Druidry & cerimonial magic .... Their are more forms of magic out their transforming America besides Hoodoo... Don't get me wrong, I practice many different magical traditions, and one of them is Hoodoo, but their is more out their than this... She met up with a group of witches in Salem, wasn't impressed -- so she pretty much left them where they were at without exploring any further ....

If it wouldn't have been for that fact, this book would have totally been a 5.

What I love about Christine Wicker is the sense of humor that she brings to each side of the arguments she chooses to write about. I read "Not in Kansas Anymore" shortly after it came out, and was horrified when I realized I hadn't left a review. What endeared me to Ms. Wicker when I read "Lily Dale" is the tongue-in-cheek approach she makes to the entire idea of magic and what it means to different groups, to individual practitioners, and ultimately to her. I loved this book, but I was surprised by it at the same time, because it was not what I expected it to be.

Much of the book concerns hoodoo which is a very difficult subject to research. Indeed, the only reliable information I have ever found is basically the only information available, provided by the proprietor of the Lucky Mojo Curio Company who plays a large part in this book. I was surprised because so much of the book concerns hoodoo and relatively little touches on what many would think of in terms of modern magick- the Neopagan population, and specifically the beliefs and practices of the different Wiccan traditions. There is talk of sigil magick and mojo hands and conjuring spirits, there's graveyard dirt and goofer dust and interesting revelations all around. But I was impressed by the fact that Ms. Wicker took what has been talked about so little concerning magick and wrote an entire book about it, setting this account apart from so many others that might stick with the "safe" subjects- the New Age, dimestore magick that is so easy to find now.

If you're looking for a recipe book of different spells and incantations, you will be disappointed. What this book does offer is a very different experience of magick than you're likely to get from a majority of the other available sources. It's the experience of a warm and open skeptic and it's fascinating in not only it's approach, but also it's honesty. I love this book and recommend it to anyone who believes in magick, but especially to those who don't.

I was looking forward to reading this book and getting a better idea and more understanding of the various non-Judeo-Christian religious groups
in this red state-God-and-guns climate we are currently enduring. But this book is so poorly written and disjointed. The author talks a little about 1 thing and then leaves the subject for several chapters. There's no real detail, history or explanation of ideology of the few groups she does address. Only 2 individuals are given any real depth. And as far as the author's claim of open-minded reporting,she seemed to have made up her mind about alot of ideas before she even started.All in all, not a good book- this one went into my rummage sale box.