Maryland Books

What a great concept- a state photo book with the option of a personalized cover. The best gift idea I've heard of in a long time. However, IDEAS often fail in their execution...

The book is of good quality itself but I was astonished at the quality of the photographs- many lacked in the quality of subject composition, some were blurry or had a bad tint, and the vast majority were simply boring. Considering that this was a largely a digital project I was very surprised. I am not a professional photographer, yet I could scrape up enough of my good shots to publish a much prettier version of Maryland. I would say about 5 photos out of the book are actually worth holding onto. Most of the photos feature people as subjects, which would have worked well if the photojournalism was better.

I do have to commend the company however on it's turn-around time on the personalized covers. I put the order in within 2 weeks of the Christmas holiday and I received it two days before the holiday. I checked the kindly provdided status link frequently and I was amazed that the job was completed within just 3 days! Although, I did end up waiting almost two weeks on pins and needles because although they claimed to send it via USPS priority mail shipping, they sent it parcel post instead.

My opinion would be to look through the book at your local store and see if you like the photos before you put your name on the front cover and personalize it. Me? I would save my money and have a photo calendar made at the local drugstore.

I thought this book:'Prince George's County Maryland', by Corpening Rowe et al would have focused more on the history of PG County. Instead it concentrated mainly, on the lives of some of the earlier families from PG and their decendents through pictures. I didn't find it useful as a historical reference book. I wanted to read something on the demographics of the county which would explain how Black people became the successful affluent majority, but would also mention other racial groups who live there too.

Lisette Felix
March 2008

Running Mates tells the story of reporter Bobby Kelleher, a political beat writer whose ordinary day in the Maryland capitol is shattered when assasins attack the governor during a speech. Kelleher and his colleague, Maureen McGuire, chase the story over the next few days as it twists and turns and ends in a dramatic climax.

Kelleher is a likeable reporter, and Feinstein nails the dynamics of newspaper politics. Editors, publishers and assorted staffers are described perfectly, and he gives a real sense of competition among daily papers and the reporters out digging for new leads. Some elements of the plot strain the reader's credulity, however, and the various conspiracies take a lot of concentration to track. Nonetheless, it's an interesting and fast-paced thriller.

At times the writing seems a bit awkward, with maybe too many inane details and sexual situations. But overall, it's a great first work of fiction from a talented writer. A sequel would be interesting, now that Kelleher's character is established. It would be fascinating to see what he covers next, and how long his editors' happiness with him lasts.

William Bloyd is my gggggrandfather and I learned my ancestors settle in Tigard Oregon by the Oregon trail. Their travels were record in the book along with wills and letters.

The person who wrote the editorial review of this book must have been reading a different book. This 'reference' is so devoid of useful information that it is the only book purchase I have ever made from Amazon where I truly feel like I deserve my money back. It doesn't even list the Native Americans that lived in the state of Maryland, much less anything about their daily life.

This book does contain a large amount of information but it reads and is set up like a glossary. It would be useful as a companion book, but not alone.

This is the worst illustrated biography for children I've ever read. Let me first say that the illustrations are beautiful... but the book, like the previous reviewer said, is full of inaccuracies. Frederick Douglass did not spend his days working in the fields, and he did not wear overalls. The author states that he had little leisure time and only one day a week... Douglass himself states in his Narrative that slave children such as himself had much time free because they were too young to work as adults did. They wore little clothing- basically only shirts- because pants were for adults. He also spent much of his childhood and adolescence in Baltimore, not on a plantation. There are further inaccuracies. The author did not do adequate research for this book, or did and ignored it.

It's a fine slave story... but for the author to pass it off as Douglass' story is wrong. The one star rating goes to the nice illustrations.

Am I the only one who knows that Mr. Douglass lost his mother at an early age and that contrary to this book, she was not a major influence in his life? The author didn't do his homework. This book is full of inaccuracies about Douglass' life.

I live in California, but went to school in Baltimore for a time, and visited frequently when I lived on the other coast. I love Baltimore. Period. With the rich and vibrant cultural and historical resources the city offers, I didn't think it would be possible to write a boring book about Baltimore. Well...

I just finished the book about an hour ago, and, like the other reviewer thus far, had to struggle to do so. I am not sure about the author's intent in writing this book. On one hand, he is nostalgic about the good old days, but in the next sentence bemoans the treatment of members of the various ethinc groups from which the city's fabric is woven. And there is a limited cast of characters that keeps reappearing...and reappearing.

At times I had the feeling that Mr. Olesker was attempting to impress me with his connections among the notables of Baltimore. If you really want a view of the people who make up this wonderful community, I'd recommend the highly entertaining fiction and non-fiction stories of Rafael Alvarez or the beautifully written and illustrated chapters from the city's history from The Baltimore Book, New Views of Local History, published by Temple University Press.

I was assigned this book for a Sociology class I am taking and being a born and raised in Baltimore, I was looking forward to reading about my hometown. Mr. Olesker attempts to tell a witty and poignant story about the melting pot that is Baltimore City, but simply winds up trying to write far beyond beyond his capabilities. The book was annoyingly overwraught with side story after side story without ever really coming to the point. I found that I was not the only person in my class who felt this way and it is unfortunate as I believe that the teacher will continue to use this as assigned reading. This book was frustrating to read and I had to force myself to the end, something I do not enjoy doing with books. If you want to truly learn about Baltimore city, come and visit us. Stop in any one of the local bars or restaurants downtown and you will surely find a local who is more than willing to chat with you about this wonderful city.

Don't be fooled like I was. The July 2007 date listed as the release date for this map book is the date ADC slapped a new cover (and new ISBN) on their 2004 edition of the maps. This item is due for an update and you should hold out for the 6th edition.

This book was extremely disappointing to me. I found so many incorrect statements that I wonder about the parts with which I am not familiar. Maryland history is of great interest to me, therefore I was anxious to read Builders of Annapolis. In the very beginning of the book it is written that settlers of Maryland were mostly Catholic. It takes very little research to determine that is an incorrect statement. The errors went on from there -- too numerous to enumerate. The author had such an interesting idea for writing about some of the early Annapolitians. Why didn't he do a better job with his research? I am sorry I bought this book.

Should the media uphold journalistic standards? I think so. But in this article, Barbara Matusow simply tries to whitewash violations of these standards. She particularly applauds National Public Radio for going to "great lengths to make sure that its Mideast reports are accurate and balanced." She admits that some of NPR's critics, such as CAMERA, disagree. But this article clearly takes NPR's side. And she is totally wrong here. NPR is heavily biased and its reports are intentionally inaccurate, unbalanced, and misleading.

Matusow actually does quote someone who mentions that news organizations are wrong to claim that criticism they receive from both sides is proof of their fairness. Journalists ought to be reporting the truth, not merely misleading their audiences and annoying those on all sides by spewing taunts and lies.

The Arab fight against Israel has been overreported. Plenty of words have been wasted on it. And I think that rarely in human history has there been as much disinformation as there is on this issue. The media ought to be ashamed of themselves. And Matusow ought to be especially ashamed. She could have exposed the media's bias and negligence. Instead, she falsely implied that the real problem is not the media but biased readers, viewers, and listeners!