Arthur Books

I have read most of the variations and book series on the King Arthur legend (Jack Whyte, Bernard Cornwell, Mary Stewart, Stephen Lawhead, etc) as well as a good deal of background information and theories. This edition intrigued me because Jack Whyte has written the forward and he has been my favorite writer on the subject ... to a point (up to the end of "Uther"). But Rosemary Sutcliff, by far, has set the standard for the conclusion of this legend. It is realistic, and most importantly, believable. You want to know the people in this book. You can see, feel and hear what they are experiencing. Her style is intelligent, interesting and true to history. And curiously, she wrote this before any one else did. THIS is how this story should end.

This is quite simply the best dark ages historical fiction novel ever written. "Sword At Sunset" tells the story of Artos the Bear, the war leader who will one day be known in legends as King Arthur, and his valiant struggle to fend off the invading Saxons, Angles and Jutes who are descending on Britain in the wake of the Roman evacuation in ever-increasing numbers. Sutcliff avoids the swords-and-sorcery of the Arthur legends and focuses on relating an amazingly accurate and realistic-seeming tale of what the TRUE Arthur must have been like. This book is in some ways a sequel to "The Lantern Bearers", which tells the story of a Roman soldier who chooses to stay behind after the legions depart Britain in the early 5th century. Here Sutcliff's magnificent prose reaches its zenith as she describes the struggles of Artos and his "Companions" to rally the populace and raise, train, and feed their army. The language crackles with authenticity, the battles are gripping, the historical detail is uncanny, the characters are all complex and multi-dimensional. Arthur in particular is portrayed as a admirable but flawed man whose failings as a husband and father are as much a driving force of his persona as his ability to attract and lead men into war. The book also touches on Arthur's negative light in many of the saint's lives, by describing his conflicts with the church over provisioning his war band. You will not find a more believable or poetically written tale of the dark ages, though Wallace Breem's "Eagle in the Snow" comes somewhat close. This one has it all and will not disappoint true fans of historical fiction looking for a realistic, well-written novel of this fascinating time.

As close as possible to depicting the real King Arthur. Beautiful, gritty, based on history and archeology. No silly fantasy here -- no Merlin, no magic, no Camelot, no Round Tables, and no damn Wiccans dancing in the moonlight.

I read "Sword at Sunset" after reading several favorable reviews from Amazon and other sources. Now that I have finished the book, I must say that I am not disappointed. To date, this is the single best Arthurian novel that I have read.

Rosemary Sutcliff does an excellent job of portraying what the real, historical Arthur might have been like. Most of the novel is based on Nennius' battle-list, although there are clear references to other early sources, such as the Lives of the Saints. She clearly has done her research, and she even manages to incorporate some of the more legendary material from later traditions in a believable way. However, in this story, there is no magic, and no Merlin. Readers who are looking for a fantasy novel might want to look at other works, such as Mary Stewart's Arthurian Saga.

The edition I read was from the 70's, and had a couple of editing errors in it, but no major problems. I assume these have probably been corrected by now. This is an excellent novel, and I can't recommend it enough!

I read this way back in the early 70's. It was one of the first historical novels which impressed me, and to this day I can still see the images Sutcliff put into my mind. No other "Arthur" has come even close to being as real as her Artos the Bear, and his post-Roman Britain. Her writing style should appeal to young readers particularly, because it is sophisticated yet accessible. I don't know how a woman author can get inside a man's head so well. That effort usually comes off feeling artificial. But not with Sutcliff's writing.

There is simply no better way to immerse yourself in the semifictional London Holmes' lives in. All the rich cultural refernces are listed, plus every minor inconsistency in a continuity line Doyle never did care about. Great reading; adds immensely to the already great stories of Holmes and Watson.

William S. Baring-Gould (1913-1967) was one of the greatest Sherlock Holmes scholars ever. Publishing several works on Holmes publically and privately, this two-volume annotation of the Holmes canon is perhaps his greatest work, and was his last. Published in 1967, the copyright inscription shows that it is held by his widow, Lucile M. Baring-Gould. Baring-Gould himself was a life-long devotee of Holmes in particular, and mysteries in general. He is also noted for the fictional biography of Nero Wolfe, in which he puts forward the idea that Nero Wolfe is the son of Sherlock Holmes, via THE woman, Irene Adler, of 'A Scandal in Bohemia'.

Sherlock Holmes is one of the best known detectives in the world -- so famous in fact, that 221B Baker Street in London continues to get mail adddressed to this fictional character almost a century after he would have died had he been a real person. There are groups of people -- Sherlockians and Holmesians, the distinction between which is rather subtle -- who delight in retelling the tales. There are forever questions and debates about the ordering of the stories; Baring-Gould is one authority often referred to in these debates, thanks to his work on the Chronology of Holmes, used as a framework for this annotated set.

Baring-Gould breaks the time frame into the follow divisions:

- The Early Holmes (1874 - 1879)
- The Partnership with Watson to Watson's first marriage (1881 - 1886)
- Watson marriage to his wife's death (1886 - 1887)
- Partnership until Watson's second marriage (1887- 1889)
- Watson's second marriage to Holmes' disappearance (1889 - 1891)
- Holmes' return to Watson's third marriage (1894 - 1902)
- The end of the Partnership (1903)
- Sherlock Holmes in Retirement (1909)
- An epilogue (1914)

Baring-Gould introduces the series with a 12-part series of essays that look at various aspects of the Sherlock Holmes legend, including foreign translations, translation into stage and screen, and highlights of particular personalities (Watson, Moriarty). He includes a wonderful brief essay by Edgar W. Smith, an early Sherlockian, which asks (and answers) the question, 'What is it that we love in Sherlock Holmes?' In the end, beyond the setting and the culture and the chase, it is the values 'implicit and eternal in ourselves' that we recognise as manifest in Holmes that keeps him an enduring character.

The volumes are the complete texts of all short stories and novels, backed up with an almost equivalent amount of textual annotation, richly accentuated with photographs, engravings, maps, and other graphics (diagrams, coats-of-arms), often taken from Holmesian sources such as journals, playbills, early editions, and even 'The Strand' magazine.

Sherlock Holmes introduces us to a world foreign yet familiar, past yet somehow present -- the stories are very contextually bound yet timeless in almost inexplicable ways, and present mysteries beyond the face-value plots. Baring-Gould's love for his subject is very apparent throughout the over 800 pages of these volumes. Some editions of this book come with a slip-cover.

This is my favourite of all my Holmes books. It is must for any fan of Holmes.

I hope I am not the only one who loves reading Sherlock Holmes but is really annoyed by "Sherlockians" - people who take their Sherlock far too literally - a lot like Trekkies, who take Star Trek just way to seriously. Baring-Gould, it seems, was the ultimate Sherlockian, and this is his masterpiece - a 1500 page annotated, illustrated, and interpreted edition of everything Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - I'm sorry, Dr. John Watson - ever wrote about the subject, plus a healthy dose of his own interpretations and those of others.

I can't remember a piece of fiction recieving as much love and attention as the works of Sherlock Holmes. This edition has illustrations, maps, definitions, references - everything. Anybody who checks the actual weather and train schedules from a piece of fiction just has too much time on his hands. It truly is a work of art, marred only by an annoying habit of Sherlockians to take their subject far, far too literally. The biggest problem I have with the tome is B-G's annoying habit of inserting his own opinions as fact. My other major peeve was his organization of the work, which put everything in the author's own chronology rather than in the order in which the books were published. This makes finding anything a bit of a chore.

As far as the new Leslie Klinger three(!) volume annotated edition of Sherlock goes, I have seen it but not purchased them. Again, shelf space seems to be the major problem here, not to mention the $125 price tag. From a brief look-over, it appears to be a more subdued, up to date, better quality edition, but less exuberant and less fun than Baring-Gould.

`The Annotated Sherlock Holmes' by William S Baring-Gould is easily one of the top two or three best examples of annotated popular literature, as good as, and possibly even better than the most famous annotation efforts by Martin Gardner on the major works of Lewis Carroll.

It is not immediately evident to me that the works of Sherlock Holmes need annotation. Unlike the works of Carroll, there are very few linguistic tricks or cleverly veiled allusions to his English contemporaries. On the other hand, over the course of the last 120 years, there has been an enormous body of work dedicated to the exegesis of Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories. There has been probably more of this activity for works of popular fiction than for the next five cases put together. To my knowledge, there is virtually no similar activity on the mystery novels of, for example, either Agatha Christie or the mystery stories of Edgar Alan Poe, to take two authors who bracket Conan Doyle's' stories in time.

It is worth the effort to determine what it is which makes the Sherlock Holmes stories so popular. One of the easiest ways is to compare Holmes to the heroes of his greatest modern imitators, the lead characters of the CSI series, most especially Gil Grissom of the original CSI show, based in Las Vegas. Both characters are `amateur' scientists in that they apply scientific disciplines to solving crimes, and actually do original work in their respective sciences, in spite of the fact that their primary avocation is `consulting detective'. In Holmes case, this was a profession he invents out of whole cloth. In the case of Grissom and his colleagues, the `consulting detective' profession has become institutionalized in the discipline of forensics, where the crime scene investigators deal with things which are beyond the ken of the average detective.

There is an eerie similarity between Holmes and Grissom in that both are very detached from many normal human interactions. Holmes rationalizes this with his theory of the mind as an attic that can hold only so much information. To add new things, old things must be discarded. For this reason, Holmes is blissfully ignorant of the planets in the solar system, but he is an expert on over 100 different types of tobacco ash. Similarly, Grissom is very poor at office politics or romantic relations in favor of his dedication to the application of entomology (study of insects) to forensics, a subject on which he is a nationally recognized authority.

It should be no surprise if the popularity of Sherlock Holmes stories may actually be gaining in popularity, as the CSI shows go a long way to validating many of the scientific principles and techniques used by Holmes. The most famous may be his search for a very sensitive reagent for the detection of blood residues. This is what Holmes is doing when he and Dr. John Watson meet for the first time in the chemical laboratory of `Barts' (St. Bartholomew's Hospital). Holmes explanation of why such a reagent is important in the investigation of crime is verified on practically every episode of CSI, whether it be in Las Vegas, Miami, or New York City. So, not only are we taken by the fact that Conan Doyle had such a good grasp of criminal investigation, but that he was so astute as to realize that such a reagent was possible.

Holmes elevates intellectual competence almost to a level of magic, using that old chestnut that if the difference in the level of technology between two parties in an encounter is great enough, that higher technology becomes indistinguishable from magic. One major difference between Holmes and Grissom is that Holmes has no modesty about his abilities, demonstrated when he belittles' the deductive powers of Edgar Alan Poe's hero in his famous story, `Murders in the Rue Morgue'.

The value of this annotation also increases over time, as the world of Sherlock Holmes is rapidly slipping away from us. These stories were written when the sun literally never set on the great British Empire, stretching across Canada, hundreds of Pacific Islands, Hong Kong, southeast Asia, much of Africa, and that greatest `Jewel in the Crown', India, where Dr. Watson himself served as a surgeon in the British Army in India. Among other things, that meant that if anything could be found in the world at all, it could be found in London. London's scientific and intellectual centers were among the greatest in the world, so it should be no surprise that the world's greatest `consulting detective' should live in London. In many ways, Sherlock Holmes is a far more believable character than his later fictional colleague, James Bond, since England's fortunes as a mover and shaker on the world stage had fallen far between 1880 and 1950.

So, our pleasure is greatly enhanced by being given copious notes on Holmes' London as well as the science of the day. Also very satisfying are the notes that correlate events in various stories. The whole collection is laid out by the fictional chronological order of Holmes' cases.

The greatness of Holmes' character can be seen in the fact that he is probably the model for over half of the great fictional detectives of the last 100 years. While I am not a great fan of detective fiction, I am certain he was the inspiration for both Agatha Christie's Hercule Poirot and Dorothy Sayers' detective, Lord Peter Whimsey. In fact, the greatness of Dashiell Hammett's and Raymond Chandler's detective writing may be in the fact that they escape the Sherlock Holmes prototype and create a new style of private detective.

This work of annotation is so good, I am hard pressed to appreciate how anyone can fully enjoy reading Sherlock Holmes without these notes. As with the commentary track on better DVD releases of movies, the notes literally double or more than double the pleasure and rereadability of the works.

Very highly recommended.

Awesome is the only word I can think of to describe this particular collection--there is all the novels and stories with amplifing info on particular items in the story/novel you are reading listed on the sides of the pages, ala footnotes (sidenotes?)--and the supplementary info is staggering, with bios of Doyle, Holmes, Watson AND Moriarty, the history of Holmes on stage, screen and in print, 221B Baker Street info, etc.--these sections take up at LEAST the front 3rd or 4th of the 1st volume alone! If you are a Holmes fan, you MUST find and buy this collection ASAP!

This entire trilogy has captived my daughter who has never loved to read due to learning challenges. She has in just a short time read the entire trilogy twice.

Kate Constable has written yet another great book for young adults, as well as older adults. The Chanter of Tremaris is a great series.

Kate Constable has given us a magical world to explore in three remarkable texts. Through these books, the author joins the company of Lloyd Alexander ("the Prydain Chronicles"), Ursula Le Guin (see "Gifts" and the just published "Voices"), and Joy Chant ("Red Moon and Black Mountain", "The Grey Mane of Morning" and "When Voiha Wakes") in creating stories and characters of depth and beauty.

To some of the other reviewers here, my suggestion is that the way to enter the Chanters of Tremaris trilogy (and, really, any work) is to let go of your expectations (whatever we think it should look and sound like) and to surrender to the magic that lives in these stories. As readers, we can fall into the trap of always scanning the horizon for something new, something that we've never seen before. The downside of this is that we often miss the treasures that are sitting at our feet. Don't miss this outstanding fantasy series.

This book, The Waterless Sea, was the best book ever! I could never put it down!
Basically Calywn and here group are chanters. They can use their magic by singing. Heben (he's awesome!) searches for them to find his taken chanter siblings. So many adventures and so little time to explain!

I loved this book. I literally read it in the space of a few hours, it was such a page-turner I could /not/ put it down.
The characters are wonderfully painted; my favorite is Halassa, with Trout following close behind (I was dissapointed at his dissapearance in this book!).
I hate Darrow. In the first book, at the beginning, when he was all crazy in Ataris and then when he was cheerful on their way to Kalysons, he was fun. But he was simply a mentor then. Now he's all dark and depressed and in love with Calwyn. Their little drama is exciting, but I dislike it and it gets in the way of the action and the suspense (for instance; Halassa's dying and their talking about their feelings. Halassa should of been a more important part of this story; considering he almost died.)
Now, Heben. I loved meeting this character; just liked I loved meeting the other main charries in the first book; it was all part of the adventure. I really hope Heben stays around. The only thing I would changed is his relantionship with Calwyn. I would of liked a tiny bit of romance between the two. So Darrow didn't simply look like a crazy jealous idiot. And so it made sense. I mean, why not Halassa instead of Heben? Calwyn was closer to Halassa then Darrow, she says so herself.
Mica and Tonno. They were slightly annoying, but lovable all the same. I kept wanting to picture them in a lounge drinking Diet Cola and making fun of Calwyn and Darrow.
Overall, the book was good. What I'm waiting for (and hoping for) is that Trout learns to chant (LOL)!

This was my kids favorite bed time story for a long time. And I must admit one of my favorites too. Although watch out for the whisper/shout page at the end of the book, it is very easy to get the kids all riled up just before bed time. Great book, we often give it as a gift.

I got this book for my nephew's birthday (he was turning 3) and he really loved it. It's really something fun and different for kids and all the parents were even entertained by it! I have had a hard time finding these books in bookstores, so I'm glad I've been able to purchase them on Amazon. I would definitely recommend this book for the little ones.

I had a couple of the Saxton Freymann books hanging around the house from my teaching days (Dog Food and How Are You Peeling). My 4 year old twins found them one day and loved them. I ordered them Food for Thought for Christmas last year and it is still a highly requested bedtime book. I love looking at the pictures as much as they do! It is amazing how they accomplish this using only food items.

Another picture book from the creative minds of Elffers and Freymann. This one illustrates concepts (shapes and colors, numbers and letters, opposites) with big, bold, and colorful photos of fruits and vegetables carved and combined into expressive faces and adorable animals and scenes. Each page is a new puzzle: H for Hair is easily identified as a leek (you might have to explain 'leek' to a child), root end up, but what are the 'insects'? (blueberries with onionskin wings). The humor may occasionally go over a child's head (look at X for X-ray) but that doesn't matter, he will still love identifying the fruits and vegetables the characters are made of. This is a wonderful book for group reading, children are captivated by the colors and illustrations and the large format makes it easy to see even for the children toward the back of the group. If you've liked others in this series you won't want to miss this one.

It's got a little bit of everything--fruits & vegetables, colors, shapes, letters, animals, opposites. Even adults will say "how imaginative!"

In response to some of the prattlings below-only those who do not know the first thing about Nietzsche think that he was at all anti-Semitic. He wrote clearly, very clearly, against that and against nationalism. In one of his books he stated that Germany should not admit any more Jews inside of her borders. Why? Because he felt that the German people lacked an identity, and knew that Jewish people had a very strong identity. He did not think that Germany, weak and unrealized as it was, could stand an influx of a people that he repeatedly characterized as remarkable.

I am somewhat obsessed with Nietzsche, and this book started it all. Do not dive into his later, more well known masterpieces (Beyond Good and Evil, the Genealogy of Morals, The Gay Science) without acquainting yourself with this book. It is an introduction to his style, and there is no better example of his mastery of psychological observations. In this book he comments on all elements of social reality ("no one thinks to thank the clever man for restraining his wit when in the company of those who cannot practice wit" for example), going into love, friendship, the tenor of social gatherings, absolutely everything that is psychologically investigatable. He brings this method to his later books, in which he tackles larger issues, like the history of religion, philosophy, morality, and other things. But it all starts here-his later critiques of Christianity and everything else are far more understandable after a thorough acquaintance with his psychological method, first and best presented here. If you are at all sensitive and introspective, this book will move you to tears more than a few times.

O.k. So I have a minor in philosophy and Nietzsche was one of my inspirations to pursue this as a degree in college. Nietzsche deals with androgony. In more modern terms, men and women are crossing over the line of androgeny with their jock image. They are getting more and more androgynous you can't distunguish between even basic differences between the sexes anymore. While my philosophy professor and classmates dismissed Nietzsche as "not being a first rate philosopher," he does have his points about god and androgeny. This is part of our changing world and in philosophy class I did make my points.

I feel obligated to correct a distortion suggested by `unraveler' below. It is popular to suggest Nietzsche was an anti-semite, but this is a rather lazy habit. Nietzsche's remark on `the youthful stock-exchange Jew' was mentioned. Here it is in its proper environment:

. . . the entire problem of the Jews exists only within national states, inasmuch as it is here that their energy and higher intelligence, their capital in will and spirit accumulated from generation to generation in a long school of suffering, must come to preponderate to a degree calculated to arouse envy and and hatred, so that in almost every nation . . . there is gaining ground the literary indecency of leading the Jews to the sacrificial slaughter as scapegoats for every possible public or private misfortune. As soon as it is no longer a question of the conserving of nations but of the production of the strongest possible European mixed race, the Jew will be just as usable and desirable as an ingredient of it as any other national residue. Every nation, every man, possesses unpleasant, indeed dangerous qualities: it is cruel to demand that the Jew should constitute an exception. In him these qualities may even be dangerous and repellent to an exceptional degree; and perhaps the youthful stock-exchange Jew is the most repulsive invention of the entire human race. Nonetheless I should like to know how much must, in a total accounting, be forgiven a people who, not without us all being to blame, have had the most grief-laden history of any people and whom we have to thank for the noblest human being (Christ), the purest sage (Spinoza), the mightiest book and the most efficacious moral code in the world. . . .

Is this anti-semitism???

if you want to have your moral foundations knocked out from under you, read this book - and then build upon the ruins - Nietzsche's, in my opinion, most accessible work, as his aphoristic style floats over many different topics - don't stop here however, i recommend Kauffman's "Nietzsche, Philosopher, Psychologist, AntiChrist" as a starter if you find the complexity and diversity of Nietzsche's thought to be overwhelming or incomprehensible - he's frequently ambiguous and contradictory but it's more a positive trademark of his works and shouldn't dissuade one from further readings.

If you like aphorisms and philosophy, this book will become one of your bibles. If nothing else, it's just plain fun to read for his incredible wit. Of course you have to put his ideas in the context of the period in which he wrote and understand that he has his own odd prejudices, but the brilliance of his understanding of the human condition really shines through. The biggest mistake any reader could make is to think Nietzsche was an anti-semite---far from it. He was anti-neanderthal. In this book especially the reader sees his low tolerance for received wisdom. This book is nothing less than part of the origin of Western psychology as practiced today. It also represents the demolition of science and philosophy polluted by the received Western theological framework. Some of the best parts are when he skewers religion. You have to love his style even if you do not agree with his pessimistic disgust for piety. This is the kind of philosophy book you need not fret over, unless you harbor wishful thinking about a supremely benevolent deity. Instead of making an elaborate argument about the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin, as preceeding systematic philosophers did literally and figuratively, Nietzsche bends the pin and throws it in the trash. I wish I had read this before his Genealogy of Morals, as knowing his thoughts here would have made that book far more interetsing and understandable. I highly recommend philosophy students first approaching Nietzsche pick up Human, All Too Human to start their study. And if you are religious and want to bolster your faith, well, you should stay far away from this book.

It is so interesting how many adoptees there are on here who are my age and raving about the book. I am 24, and I was adopted as a baby. I grew up reading this book and always understood that I was adopted. This book was SUCH a comfort to me and I would read it over and over. I came on here to buy one for friends who are adopting, in hopes that it will be of comfort to their little one. I definitly recommend this book, it was a great help to me.

I'm 23, my younger sister is 20. We are both adopted from seperate birthparents.
I don't remember not knowing I was adopted. I remember reading this book a lot though. My cousin and I would read it out loud to each other and laugh at the pictures. When my sister was old enough, two or three I think, I started reading it to her. This book is something that will always be a good memory. It helped me understand who I was and what it meant to be adopted.

As an adoptee, I remember reading and re-reading this book many times with my parents. This book was always on my bookshelf and did much to help me understand adoption, babies, family and most importantly the love my parents have for me. Like a reviewer before me, my original copy has been lost, lent with love to another family who had adopted a child. Now I can't wait to pass this on to another family, my friends who have recently adopted their own child. I know reading this book together will help strengthen their bond as she grows.

An earlier review criticized this book's readability and appropriateness for children. As a child who owned it, I do not believe that is an accurate assesment.

As a 25 year old adoptee, I have tremendously strong and positive memories of this book. Like other reviewers here, I can't remember the first time I read it... it was always a part of my reading life as a child.

I adored this book back then. I must have read it quite literally hundreds of times; enough so that at one point my mom had to sew the spine back on.

Once, I brought it to school for show and tell. I used it to show the other kids that I was pretty special, because there were books written about me! It just made me feel that my history as an adoptee was valuable.

I recommend this book to any families with adopted children, absolutely. Of course, open discussion about adoption should first and foremost come from the parents themselves... but as long as that is accomplished, I really believe that many adopted children will cherish this book as much as I did.

I'm a 23 year old adoptee and this is the book my mom and dad used to tell me when I was little. I still share the book with others and recommend it to parents of other adopted children. It took them reading it to me a few times before I finally got it, but that's because they started young and wanted me to always know. Because I was told at such a young age and because it was treated as nothing to ever be embarrassed about I grew up thinking it was cool and something that made me special. I recommend this book and this approach to any and all adopting families! The illustrations will make you laugh out loud (ex. a baby coming out of a gumball machine)! This book is WONDERFUL!

This book is all you really need to go to Alaska. If you are a fan of Frommers products you will not be dissapointed. It's a thorough and accurate overview of all the basics needed when planning an Alaskan getaway.

I received the 2008 edition for Christmas...
true to Frommer's form. Great "Best of Alaska"
and "Planning your Trip" chapters...good inter-
net links and current contact phone numbers.
Nice section of "Alaska in Depth."

What more can one say about Frommer? You can't, or shouldn't, take any trip without taking along Frommer's reviews/commentary, and what to see and do books. Our trip to Alaska was just fantastic, and the information provided in it on everything from travel by cruise ship, history and what land tours to take was outstanding. I purchased the book (and others like it) from Amazon, and they all arrived in a timely manner, and the "price was right".

This book has been very informative in helping us to select which cruise line, tours and offshore excursions we plan to take advantage of while in Alaska. I highly recommend reading this BEFORE BOOKING and taking it along as a guide on your trip. It gives insider tips you may not have thought about when planning a trip. JPB

Doing a road trip via Motor Home...great explanations of camp sites, fishing, etc. Very helpful for a first time visitor for sure!

The young Hal and his instructor in the art of living the good life , Falstaff cavort through the first half of Henry IV as if life were going to be one long , irresponsible entertainment. The dramatic transformation of all of this , and Hal's casting off of Falstaff, and moving to kingly responsibility will come in the Henry IV Part II.
What is present here throughout is the tremendous richness of Shakespeare's imagination in his creation of character, and inventiveness in language , in his ability to create so many different moods and feelings.
'Falstaff' is one of Shakespeare's most beloved characters, and one of the great figures in the Comedy of world literature.
Enjoy.

This is the play where the Percy rebellion begins and centers around the Achilles-like Hotspur. Eventually, Hotspur (Henry Percy) and Prince Hal (Henry Monmouth - later Henry V) battle in single combat.

We also get to see the contrast between these young men in temperament and character. King Henry wishes his son were more like Hotspur. Prince Hal realizes his own weaknesses and seems to try to assure himself (and us) that when the time comes he will change and all his youthful foolishness will be forgotten. Wouldn't that be a luxury we wish we could all have afforded when we were young?

Of course, Prince Hal's guide through the world of the cutpurse and highwayman is the Lord of Misrule, the incomparable Falstaff. His wit and gut are featured in full. When Prince Hal and Poins double-cross Falstaff & company, the follow on scenes are funny, but full of consequence even into the next play.

But, you certainly don't need me to tell you anything about Shakespeare. Like millions of other folks, I am in love with the writing. However, as all of us who read Shakespeare know, it isn't a simple issue. Most of us need help in understanding the text. There are many plays on words, many words no longer current in English and, besides, Shakespeare's vocabulary is richer than almost everyone else's who ever lived. There is also the issue of historical context, and the variations of text since the plays were never published in their author's lifetime.

For those of us who need that help and want to dig a bit deeper, the Arden editions of Shakespeare are just wonderful.

-Before the text of the play we get very readable and helpful essays discussing the sources and themes and other important issues about the play.

-In the text of the play we get as authoritative a text as exists with helpful notes about textual variations in other sources. We also get many many footnotes explaining unusual words or word plays or thematic points that would likely not be known by us reading in the 21st century.

-After the text we get excerpts from likely source materials used by Shakespeare and more background material to help us enrich our understanding and enjoyment of the play.

However, these extras are only available in the individual editions. If you buy the "Complete Plays" you get text and notes, but not the before and after material which add so much! Plus, the individual editions are easier to read from and handier to carry around.

I am actually reviewing both Parts One and Two with this since they should be read together.The reason why I enjoyed these plays so much is because we see Falstaff in both of them. He is my favourite Shakespearean character - big, bawdy, rough, a liar and a cheat, but again we know what he is right from the beginning, and Shakespeare keeps him so true to character. These plays are a bit different from some of the other histories. There are more comedic parts in them for one thing. The plays are certainly used as a medium for introducing young Hal (who will become King Henry V). We see him as a young man, and watch him grow and see the influences that his society and the people in it have on his development. He doesn't appear to be growing up well according to his father because he is so irresponsible. King Henry IV was not England's strongest ruler. He was haunted by his guilt over the death of his predecessor, King Richard II. In Part Two, comedy still plays a big role, and we still see Falstaff's influence on young Hal until the shocking moment of Falstaff's death. The best part about Part Two though is the deathbed scene between old King Henry IV and his son Prince Henry. The play leads us to "King Henry V". Prince Hal does finally grow up and he becomes a very strong leader. Actually King Henry Iv, Parts one and two should be read before King Henry V. It is the correct sequence and we see Prince Hal grow and mature.

Henry IV remains one of my favorite Shakespeare plays, even though the tragedies and comedies get far more attention and seeming appreciation than do the histories. As an English major, I examined Henry's (Hal's) character, and I focused on his development from a somewhat foolhardy young man into a self-assured, even manipulative prince. It is hard to say which of these Hal truly is, or if he is a little bit of both.

At the beginning of the play, Hal spends his free time cavorting around with his friend Falstaff (who provides all of the laughs in the play and is cited as one of the best comic characters in all literature). In the first act we already see hints in Hal's sololiquy that he may not be as carefree as we are led to believe, and that he might betray friends like Falstaff to be the prince that he is expected to be. Read on in "Henry V" to see just how much of a polished politician Hal becomes--his battle cries and his "once more unto the breech, dear friends" is masterful in its persuasiveness and ability to induce his countrymen to fight.

Hotspur serves as a nice counterpoint to Hal in "Henry IV." Hotspur is the hothead and Hal makes his decisions calmly and rationally. This almost inhuman rationality comes into play again in "Henry V" and makes you long for the seemingly carefree Hal.

All in all, "Henry IV" is a great read and quite an interesting character study--I highly recommend it!

In Part One of Shakespeare's "Henry IV," the titular king tries to defend his throne from a rebel army led by the hotheaded Hotspur, who has a long list of grievances about the king's treatment of his family, the Percys. Hotspur has allied himself with several principal figures including his uncle the Earl of Worcester, his brother-in-law Mortimer the Earl of March, Lord Douglas the Scot, and Owen Glendower, a Welsh chieftain with a vivid mystical imagination -- he is so egotistical that he insists an earthquake that occurred the day of his birth was a divine proclamation of his importance -- and a desire to usurp all of Wales from the king.

While he is preparing for war against the rebels, Henry IV laments that his own son Henry (Hal), the Prince of Wales, is a shameful libertine living the high life in London and consorting with a gang of scurrilous miscreants. Indeed, Prince Hal's idea of fun is robbing people, and his best friend and accomplice in this activity is Sir John Falstaff, who turns out to be not Hal's peer but a middle-aged man. In a character transformation of an abruptness that can only be described as magical, Hal becomes a serious young man determined loyally to defend his father's kingship from Hotspur's assault after he receives an earnest lecture from his father about the dangers of acting irresponsibly as a public figure.

Not enough can be said about Falstaff, who is undoubtedly one of the most richly realized characters in literature. He is fat, lazy, cowardly, yet boastful, but not in the same way Owen Glendower is -- Owen really believes what he says; Falstaff is just trying to make himself look better than he actually is, but fools nobody because he prevaricates and embellishes without bothering to remember his previous lies for the sake of consistency. You probably know somebody like this in real life -- especially if you're ten years old. Falstaff's piquancy, in fact, so outweighs the stature of the other characters that his absence is sorely felt in the scenes in which he does not appear.

Most of all, Part One of "Henry IV" is a play of contrasts personified by Prince Hal and Hotspur, who incidentally is also named Henry. In their confrontation on the battlefield, it seems unlikely that Hal, who wasted many of his best days living as a rake, could conquer a seasoned warrior like Hotspur in a swordfight. But there wouldn't be much of a tale to tell if not to show Hal triumphing after his resolution to change his weak habits, and the play ends with the conviction that, despite his past mistakes, he would make a noble king himself.

In the opening lines of chapter 3 Bryan Magee, paraphrasing Schopenhauer, writes: "If there is to be any point in my looking for something, I need to have some idea of how I shall know if I find it". Whoever comes to philosophy would be well-advised to keep this in mind. Can we really read philosophy without any idea, or to use an expression from Saul Bellow, any `metaphysical hunch' about what we think (or hope) to find? It was while reading this wonderful book on Schopenhauer that I suddenly, and quite unexpectedly, found the answer to the question, "Why do I read philosophy?". And the answer was not, as the expected knee-jerk response would have it, to find `truth', but to break away, if only for a moment, from the deadening gravity of the obvious and the mundane into an awareness of a reality more awesome and profoundly mysterious. For me few philosophers manage this better than Schopenhauer, and Magee is absolutely brilliant at conveying this to his readers in his book The Philosophy of Schopenhauer. Hardly surprising from a man, who, on another occasion wrote,

"At the heart of the mystery, it seems to me, must lie the relationship between the self and the empirical world in which it is not an object. In fact I am tempted to believe that the ultimate mystery `is' the relationship between the self and the empirical world. With his usual acumen Schopenhauer thought this, `the solution of the riddle of the world is only possible through the proper connexion of outer with inner experience, effected a the right point.' The first time I read those words I got gooseflesh all over my body, my scalp pricked and tingled, and I knew that I was going to read every word written by Schopenhauer". (Confessions of a Philosopher - Bryan Magee).

I find it amusing that someone would give this excellent overview of Schopenhauer a two-star rating on the grounds that it is "difficult". Schopenhauer's philosophy is profound and requires much thought and reflection in order to grasp it. There may be "easier" introductions than this book but if you want to actually try and understand Schopenhauer then read this book. Remember, understanding Schopenhauer or any great philosopher will be difficult. If you can't do "difficult" then read Dr. Seuss.

If you are coming from psychoanalysis, this might be a good book to explore its philosophical roots. You can disregard his opinions on women. In fact, please do so.

Bryan Magee has done a superlative job in writing this work. It is both a review and explanation of Schopenhauer's philosophy as well as an exposition of his influence on artists such as Richard Wagner. There is also much biographical material on Schopenhauer. This is a 400 page book and will take a while to get thru. It is not an easy read, though well written. It's just that Schopenhauer's philosophy takes some time to get used to if you have not encountered him before. But you will be richly rewarded.

Perhaps the most unjustly neglected philosopher in the western world. I would hope this very readable introduction will encourage more people to take up the study of this great thinker. Bryan Magee, as usual does, what many professional philosphers are unable or unwilling to do: he makes philosophy accessible to almost everyone. While I haven't found Schopenahuer's writing all that difficult, reading this first has helped me grasp The World as Will and Representation better than I could have without it.

Philosophy needs more Schopenahuers and Magees and fewer obfuscators.

"Darkness at Noon" is one of those books that stays in your mind long after you put it down. I first read it more than 30 years ago when I was a high school student reading "serious" books for the first time. It just knocked me over, and raised questions about personal morality and the ends of politics that made other authors I was reading (such as Ayn Rand) seem incredibly shallow by comparison.

Recently I read the book again to see if it was as good as I remembered. I'm happy to say that it's even better. "Darkness at Noon" is the story of an Old Bolshevik who re-examines his life's work in the communist party when he is caught up in the purge trials of the 1930s. As such, the book is a great analysis of the pathology and twisted logic that corrupted mid-20th century communism. But the book is also a broader exploration of ends-justify-means morality, exposing the traps and contradictions we fall into when truth and common decency are thrown overboard in the name of social utility. "Darkness at Noon" easily transcends old controversies about communism. Indeed, in an age when the U.S. operates secret torture camps to fight terror, its message has lost none of its power or relevance.

The story is gripping. The writing is superb. The characters are vivid. Dialogues of near-Dostoyevskian intensity alternate with passages of introspection and guilty memories. Read it. It may even make you feel 17 again -- and wide open to the impact of great literature. Six stars.

Heck, seven stars....

The brilliant and controversial writer Arthur Koestler's "Darkness at Noon" may be looked upon as an incisive diatribe against Soviet Communism under Stalin, but it was influenced by Koestler's own experience as a prisoner during the Spanish Civil War. That experience gives Rubashov's incarceration the ring of authenticity and we read about his plight with confidence in it's truth. This veracity is what gives the novel it's strength. You also have the feeling that although it is written in 3rd person narrative, it could have been based on a written diary or journal of an actual prominent victim of the Stalinist purges.

Rubashov is a victim, but not an innocent victim. He was an architect of the repressive regime that has turned to devouring it's creators and enablers. His own ruthlessness and duplicity in support of the Communist ideal has destroyed any sympathy we can have for him, but what Koestler is aiming for is understanding, not sympathy. We can empathize with Rubashov without feeling pity. We are not shown monsters, but people whose morals and ethics are weakened by fear and ambition, and who make critical decisions at the intersection of hopeful idealism and grim reality.

After reading this sobering book, you can almost understand why this great mind (Koestler), who observed first hand, the atrocities perpetrated by regimes under Hitler and Stalin, would take a decidedly dark and pessimistic view of society, especially in it's political concerns, and would turn to metaphysics and parapsychology to find a reason for prospective hope in the human condition.

The phrase Orwellian only deserves to be classified as a derivative of the work of Koestler whose slightly-earlier reflections are a telling reflection on the spirit of Marxism with greater poignancy since they come from one who formerly professed Marxism as a positive doctrine. While some of the narrative aspects of Darkness at Noon are slow-moving, they add to the ponderous nature of the subject at hand as the character of Rubashov questions his adherence to an ideology which has seemingly stripped the skin off humanity without the ability to graft a glorious replacement on the exposed internal organs. The doubts of a noble, high-minded reformer are poignant to any reader who has ever considered the interplay between the individual and the whole of society.

This perennially question of all philosophy, the question of the One and the Many touches the core of our questing for the Truth and easily makes one sympathetic to the trials of the reformer who desires both to enact the noble goals of the revolution but also realizes that so much has been lost on the way that it is quite possible to question the result. In the face of cold, hard, systematic logic which easily leads one to believe with certainty in the questionable fate of the future, Rubashov quavers both against his own questioning as well as against his own self-assured innocence in the face of charges against his devotion to the Party's cause. Such a duality of confidence is naturally found in all of humanity and retains a poignancy for all readers who have considered the noble weight of the Truth against the dangers of liberty-destroying force. The story of a confused Marxist is not that different from the story of any person, even the most devout of Christians who desires for adherence to the Truth of Faith while dually acknowledging the necessity of freedom, an acknowledgement which leads to difficult choices and seemingly-insurmountable contradictions. For this reason, Darkness at Noon is a read of great importance today, even for those who are furthest from the philosophical social materialism of Marxism.

Set during the Stalinist purges and show trials, `Darkness at Noon' presents a fictionalized account of the interrogation and breaking of a (former) communist leader `Rubashov'. Under Stalin, 'former communists' were limited to those persons about to be executed, already executed, or waiting to be uncovered. As an original Bolshevik, a leader of the 1917 revolution, Rubashov's disillusionment was simply inadmissible to Number One (as Stalin is referred to by Koestler).

Koestler explores the journey of Rubashov from the knock at the door through the final denouement. The reader observes Rubashov, who plays the role of narrator, as he undergoes the psychological change from a determination to resist to nearly total capitulation. Rubashov manages to hold to some crumbs of self-respect, but yields to the logic of the revolution as more important than any individual even when the accusations are complete fabrications.

`Darkness at Noon' is precisely imagined with its details of Rubashov pacing the floor of his small isolation cell, the coded tapping between adjacent cells, and the deprivation of physical comforts that make the subsequent small graces, such as limited outdoor exercise, become precious by comparison. This much of the tale was informed by Rubashov's experiences as a prisoner during the Spanish Civil War. Koestler's examination of the psychological destruction of the prisoner is fascinating, although at times it briefly lapses into stultifying disquisitions on the distorted Stalinist political philosophy.

Koestler himself was a German communist through much of the 1930's before immigrating to Britain, leaving the party and becoming an influential ex-communist. George Orwell's excellent essay about Koestler is readily available on the Internet (google `arthur koestler orwell').

Darkness at Noon was the middle book of an unusual trilogy of loosely related subjects: Gladiators and Arrival and Departure (20th Century Classics). Readers may also wish examine Victor's Serge's The Case of Comrade Tulayev (New York Review Books Classics).

Highly recommended for anyone interested in the era of communism in its Stalinist form or more broadly in the perverse ability of humans to place greater meaning in abstract and abstruse ideology than in the actual lives of other humans.

I'm afraid to read anything else by Arthur Koestler.

"Darkness at Noon," his excellent novel about an aging revolutionary awaiting a show-trial and execution in Stalin's Soviet Union, is so thoroughly compelling and readable, alive with ideas and general brilliance, and so widely recognized as Koestler's masterpiece, that I fear his other books will be disappointing by comparison.

This, on the other hand, may well be my favorite book. Ever. Despite the fact that my "to-read" pile is a paper stalagmite that grows faster than I can chip away at it, I ripped through this one twice in under six months, and if I were somehow locked in the bathroom with only this on the toilet tank, and forced to start it a third time--I can't imagine this actually happening, but bear with me here--I can't say I'd be all that disappointed.

This reads like "1984," but it preceded Orwell's book, and presumably greatly influenced it. More importantly, although the real 1984 eventually rolled around to make Orwell's dystopia seem at least somewhat absurd (in execution, if not idea and desire), this still feels incredibly realistic.

And scarily, this is more relevant to today's America. While our level of freedom and political discourse may be completely different than that of Stalin's Soviet Union, the methods they used would not be unfamiliar in Guantanamo or Abu Grahib--or in some police precincts. Not the shrill and scary tactics of "1984," but the soft and simple: psychological games, sleep deprivation, and the like. Sleep deprivation may seem downright kind in the pantheon of torture, and I'm sure it starts off relatively innocuously--"They're terrorists, they're criminals, so why should we coddle them? Why should they get a good night's sleep?"--but any tactic whereby one compels the body to betray the mind is torture. And the sad thing is that torture doesn't work. Forget all the crazy ticking time-bomb scenarios, the fact is simple. Torture. Doesn't. Work. It does not provide reliable information or accurate confessions. And this book shows why. Rubashov, kept up for days on end, becomes willing to say or do anything for a few blessed moments of sleep. He will sell himself out. He will say anything. He will lie.

The strange peculiarity of Soviet Russia is that the victim and the torturers both know these lies are lies. But he says them, and they listen, because they both have their roles to play. The show trial is not really a trial. It is only a show.

But the great thing about "Darkness at Noon" is that it isn't just a polemic about tactics or a lesson about history; it is a powerful meditation on good and evil, and the extent to which we allow the latter in the short term because we believe it will somehow help us get the former in the long term. One reads this and feels sympathy not just for Rubashov, but for his interrogators, because they grapple with a timeless question: can we, and should we, make today difficult and imperfect and unjust for the sake of a better tomorrow?

This is a weighty question, and the book abounds with such meditations: like Dostoyevsky's works--to which it is clearly in debt--it is a philosophical novel with true weight and depth. In "The Grand Inquisitor", one of the most famous chapters in literature, Dostoyevsky concocts a prison scene in which the head of the Spanish Inquisition discourses to Jesus on why the Church felt it necessary to behave in ways contrary to Jesus' teachings. And this book feels like "The Grand Inquisitor" writ large. Though it revolves around ideology instead of religion, the effect is similar--disciples explaining to the master why they needed to stray, why they needed to corrupt and pervert their beliefs in order to save them from external enemies, why they needed to destroy the movement in order to save it.

On this and many other issues, Rubashov ponders but--importantly--does not always come up with clear answers. "How can one change the world if one identifies oneself with everybody?" he muses early on, then asks, "How else can one change it? He who understands and forgives--where would he find a motive to act? Where would he not?" I don't think Koestler wants to give us answers. Like the best artists, he's not so much interested in telling us what to think as he is in making us think. It's not always about finding answers; it's about remembering to ask questions. And that's something we need to remember today.