Benedict Books

This was a fantastic book! It really makes you think. I am a female who loves basketball and this book made reality set in! It makes you realize that you have to separate what a player does on the court from who he is. He may be a great player, but that doesn't mean he is that great off the court as well! Benedict makes some great points about the lifestyle of an NBA player!

This book flows in an easy reading style, but the book apparently wasn't carefully proofread, because there are a number of misspellings and incorrect wordings. That sends a message that if you don't care, why should I. As for the complaint that professional athletes are getting the primadonna treatment without accountability for bad behavior, I can only withhold my payment for a ticket to the game as punishment. Another book I read points out: have you ever noticed that people often complain to the wrong person or persons about something they have the power to change or resolve. Only the industry can really do something to change the problem.

One of the consistent trends in modern American history is the progressive shrinking of the number of occupations in which those employed are exempt from public scrutiny. Used to be the President was above the fray, but Nixon and Watergate changed all that. Likewise, the fatherhood got tainted by the sex-abuse scandals starting in the 1980's. The occupation of NBA player has now succumbed to this trend, as books like these examine the seedy side of NBA life and its players.

Written by a veteran observer of the American professional sports scene, this book goes into gory detail to show how a very large number of current NBA athletes are out and out felons; rapists, shoplifters, wife-beaters, etc, etc... Names are named, along with details of various crimes committed by players at all positions on numerous NBA teams. As such, the book is quite-opening to the casual sports fan and to the American public at large. However, the book is lacking some ingredients. First, the style and substance of the book seems to indicate that this lawlessness has grown over time. Maybe it has, but a more likely explanation is that the press has gotten more agressive over time. Second, the book should have included something on treatment plans the NBA offers its players for various problems such as marriage counseling, substance abuse rehab, etc, etc... Third, it would have been nice for the book to not focus on such a small number of players: i.e. Ruben Patterson and Sam Mack. A lot of players have done illegal things, or even legal things that are not so nice; Wilt Chamberlain's 20,000 bedscores is not something a gentleman or civil society in general should be proud of. But overall, this is a good book. I recommend every parent to give this book to their son when he asks for the latest $100+ NBA jersey or b-ball shoes!

I enjoyed reading this book it tells the truth about the thugs that many Americans have idiolized simply because they play basketball.

The days of Larry Bird and Michael Jordan are long gone. Todays players are a bunch of immature perverts. Read this book if you want to know about the people you let your children idiolize.

This is a actual excerpt from the book "... there is nothing admirable or beautiful about today's NBA player: diamond studded ears, flesh plastered with offensive body tattoos, and nicknames like 'The Answer' and 'Big Dog.'"

Are you serious? Personal appearance is now a problem in the NBA as well? Bring back the white guys with the crew cuts!

Benedict has a agenda, and even went as far to exaggerate the skills of certain players that committed a crime. A whole two chapters were devoted to Sam Mack... who I forgot existed until I vaguely remembered a shooter that played for the Rockets. Noting that players like Jerry Stackhouse, Damon Stoudamire and Jason Richardson were all-stars when in fact none of them have ever made the team. Should I trust the rest of his facts he presents?

While I agree that people should explore different forms of eating, one diet does not suit all. Also I found some of Ehret's comments offensive since I am White and of European decent. He should have left his prejudices in the closet and focused on scientific and unbiased researched opinions. Good health means a good heart as well. Many physicians ignore just how much your outlook can affect your health. Fasting is not a way of life nor should it be. It needs to be monitored and depending on the person or body type not necessarily the best solution. Ridding your diet of processed, refined foods is the first step. Doing this, you will discover in time the foods that you are sensitive to and then can avoid them. Fasting and starvation is not a healthy way to live. You will eventuallly deplete yourself.

To many, many if not all of Ehrets' works are Bibles of Authority.
Tread wisely and lightly.

Arnold Ehret is a true leader and master in his field, but for many his field is a field of misery and misunderstanding.

Use what you can and leave the rest, there is plently to learn from this master and plently to overturn.

His agenda was to get well, and with that in mind you cannot go wrong, but it takes diligent hard work and sacrifice and thats the rub...!

Enjoy!

I follow a relatively strict, vegan eating regime, so his method is not even as strict as mine. If you are trying to make a change from the average american, carnivore way of eating, this is not the book for you. Read it only if you are very serious and dedicated about your diet and nutritional habits.

This book gives a detailed diet for healing through fasting and dietary modification. Far ahead of his time in developing low fat/low carb diets.

The dynamic tension exercises are easy and very helpful, like a quick 'adjustment', but with you in control.

Dr. Ehret's 'new' physiology, with the lungs as the PUMP and the heart as a valve, give new understanding to our physical problems and how the body really works.

His untimely death was a great loss to our world, since his message is capable of redirecting our habits and culture to a much better world of health and longevity.

The basic idea of avoiding certain foods that aren't good for the body is worthwhile. However, the book rambles in information that isn't that helpful. The key is eating more vegetables and fruits and avoiding mucus causing foods. An internet search may give you the quick information of this and you can skip this book. Also, books that deal with getting rid of inflamation in the body will be helpful. It is amazing how many diseases and ailments can be healed by changing what we eat... choose well for a healing fountain of youth!

The book arrive in excellent condition, like new. I have started reading it, and it is very entertaining and informative so far. Hopefully will help me in my own writing. The author, Elizabeth Benedict, collects writing samples of authors writing about sex, and talking about the topic in interviews with her.

Elizabeth Benedict's look at sex in fiction is not only a "how-to" book on making sex matter in a novel, it also includes a collection of novels and short stories that every writer should read. Benedict gives hot and steamy passages from some of the country's best authors and shows us why they are effective. Not only do these passages get us hot under the collar, but they also move the story.

Sex is not meant as an instruction manual in fiction, to paraphrase Benedict. If one wants assistance in how a love scene (no matter how good or bad the lovers actually are) can move a story, it is a great piece of reading.

It took me several months to read this book because after each chapter, I had to go back into stories I had written before and change them! Benedict is quite thought-provoking in her analysis. Also, she includes excerpts from famous authors and their views towards sex in their literature.

Many different avenues towards sex are explored: the first time, recreational sex, gay sex, straight sex, married sex, adultery...the list literally goes on.

Even though I have already read it once, it is still at my computer terminal in my office. I definitely suggest reading her book and the recommended books that are within it.

I had the pleasure of hearing a lecture and visiting with Elizabeth Benedict, which inspired me to choose this book when I was pondering the best way to approach the sexuality component of a couple of characters in a mystery novel. I'm glad I did. Despite the title, this book is really about the joy of writing great fiction - and how to use sex as another tool for advancing plot, enhancing characterization, writing revealing dialogue, etc. Although the topic is ostensibly the act of sex, Benedict's book is really about how the act of sex helps readers understand what's going on in your book and in your characters' lives in a way that most people understand is about far more than the plumbing of our human anatomy. Benedict structures her book well and productively, with lists where appropriate and a consistent format in each chapter. Her best advice (which you'll have to read the book to truly appreciate): make sure there's always at least two things going on.

I agree with the review that says this book is dull, dry and boring. Very hard to get into, and hard to stick with it.

I am an aspiring romance writer and bought this book to help me write the love scenes. It did not meet my needs in any form whatsoever.

This book is more a discussion of the different types of sex: heterosexual, homosexual, masturbation, incest, rape, adultry, etc, and would be better categorized at such. It also seems to be aimed at those who write sex scenes that are just for the sake of sex, not scenes about love shared between two people. While it may be helpful to some, it wasn't to me and my writing.

This is the first time I've ever requested a refund from Amazon, it was that bad.

The information has been very helpful to me during my writing.

This was an excellent book for anyone who is interested in the efforts to be the first to reach the moon. I have been a space junkie from the times my Mom would keep us home from school to watch the Mercury and Gemini launches. I was reminded of many things I observed and realized that my memories of the flights were from the perspective of a child. Hearing about the same events from the perspective of those who participated was very rewarding.

I'm a typical space nut, and to me, any space book is a good space book. I read this book all in one day and I was not disappointed. It gave me a lot of information about the Russian's race to the moon, and I learned stuff that I never knew before.
The part about Slayton in Russia is particularly funny. If you don't know what I'm talking about, read this book for yourself. You won't be sorry!
The only disadvantage is that there are a lot of cuss words in it, which should have been censored out before the book was published. Oh well!

This book is really great. Read it!

This review is based on the original (1994) hardback edition. This book is much more than a history of the space program from about 1957 to 1975. It includes the inspirational determination for Shepard to fly again and for Slayton to fly even once. I had the pleasure of meeting Alan Shepard and getting his autograph on this book.

The book captures the intensity of the space race. When Shepard saw Sputnik 1 (or, more probably, the upper-level rocket stage also in orbit), he chagrined at the fact that it didn't have "Made in the USA" written on it. Later, the Soviets were sad that the men circling the moon on Christmas Eve 1968 didn't have Russian names.

Some seldom-discussed information is provided in this book. For instance, the US could have orbited a satellite over a year before Sputnik (p. 45). Were it not for an overcautious NASA, Shepard could have beat Gagarin into space by a month (p. 89, 91). The dog, Laika, is said to have lived for several days in space (p. 44). We now know that she died several hours after launch--from an overheated cabin.

The authors discuss the politics behind the space program. For instance, the grounding of Deke Slayton had been for political and not medical reasons, as there was no evidence that Deke's heart irregularity would interfere with space flight. Rather, the fear was that, were Slayton's flight to end in disaster for any reason, his heart condition would automatically be suspected, and those who cleared him for flight would face automatic recrimination. The authors also allege that politics was behind the choice of Houston as the site for the Space Center. Both astronauts also had to contend with politics in the wake of the Apollo 13 near-disaster, notably the call, by some politicians, to cancel all remaining Apollo moon flights. Shepard also realized that, were his Apollo 14 to fail to land on the moon, there most probably would be no further Apollo flights.

One is thrilled by Alan Shepard finding a surgical treatment for his Meniere's syndrome, and getting restored to flight status. Up to that time, he had considered himself an eagle whose wings had been clipped and who had been forced to be a turkey--in more ways than one.

Then, over ten years after his grounding, Deke Slayton got his chance...in a joint US-Soviet flight that would have been equally unimaginable at the time of his grounding.

I re-visited this book, which I read (and got autographed by Shepard) when it was new, after watching the great "From the Earth to the Moon" series again. The book has its four-star moments, but I settled for three.

The content is not particularly sophisticated, and to be honest, the competition among the Apollo books is strong. For example, books by Lovell and Cernan are both better than this one. Even so, it's worth reading by students of the space program for the additional perspective and occasion detail.

Perhaps a root problem is that the book is a mixture of autobiography and story of the space program, with the perspective of the two astronauts not given very often. When that happened effectively, the book was at its best. I liked stories such as NASA's attempt to keep secret who had gotten the first flight, Deke's grounding, Shepard's return to flight status, Apollo 14, and Deke's reaction to the Apollo 1 fire. There are several scenes like that, enough to make the book worthwhile.

In contrast, some other incidents had superfluous reference to the authors. I didn't really care that Deke and Al sort-of high-fived each other when Apollo 11 landed. Their thoughts on the end of the Apollo program or what the program really meant to them aren't really captured. Few insightful comments about the other astronauts were made (unlike Cernan's book). Many opportunities were lost.

The Apollo-Soyuz mission is presented as a relatively big deal, which it was to Deke, obviously. In reality, it was pretty meaningless, other than as an exercise in international cooperation.

Deke comes across pretty well in other books and in the "From the Earth to the Moon" series. His character shines at times here, too. Maybe some remarks by other people about Deke, besides from Shepard, would have helped convey that image. How did others feel about how Deke ran the astronaut office, which was his core contribution to the space program? You won't find that in this book.

More great lessons and insight from the Holy Father.
He is truly a wise and humble teacher that can get the point across directly; and I am always amazed that it is translated as though he wrote in English!

I consider that nowadays Pope Benedict XVI is currently "an universal moral reference" for mankind, the Catholic Church is all over the world the only one of churches growing vigorously among the young and the intellectuals .. The message of Jesus is as fresh as always !!!

Although I am a Protestant, I found the Pope's book enlightening and interesting. The first two chapters are rich in wisdom, pointing out our blessing of the Lord's very presence as we minister, and the living tradition which the Apostles and subsequent ministers have passed on to us. Throughout this book, the Pope pointed out the greater symbolism of various events in which the Apostles participated. For example, the theological significance of the great catch of fish. He also summarized the theological importance of his points, emphasizing key matters such as what constitutes a good witness: those that compel us to "come and see." His command of the first century evangelistic campaign and the order of events was revealed in an easy to follow manner. He identifies various characteristics of the Apostles and relates them to Christ's overall ministry. Furthermore, he draws from early church writings. Most importantly, the Pope supported his teachings with scripture and flatly stated that we are saved by faith alone. This should be appreciated by both Catholics and Protestants.

Curtis Mosley
Houston, Texas
May 25, 2008

This book is well-written but its title is deceptive. The early chapters front-load what follows with the theological premises of the Roman Catholic Church so it is less about the Apostles than we might hope. BXVI is known as a scholar, and certainly his scholarly bent shows in what he writes, leaving many people who haven't personally dug into the current scholarship feeling impressed. If one believes in apostolic succession and Christ's entrusting the apostles with maintaining fidelity and truth (and this reviewer does accept this concept), then there are those of us who feel that the mandate for truth has failed. I have to assume that the Bishop of Rome believes what he has written, but the world has changed in that the world of scholarship is open to those of us in the pews. We don't have to accept a distorted and incomplete scholarship. We're no longer illiterates who are dependent upon the Church to tell us what to believe. We can dig it out and weigh its efficacy for ourselves. It cannot be that the Bishop of Rome is unaware of the extensive scholarship, as he has the unfathomable riches of the Roman Catholic Church that would make it easy.

I will only briefly address two overwhelmingly glaring areas. We note that women disciples are discussed in the very back of the book. BXVI lists many of the women, but he is only able to magnify the works of those who are coupled, such as Priscilla and Aquila. He makes no note of the importance that in scripture, Priscilla is listed first. And he manages to get through chapters on St. Paul's co-workers and the chapter on women without mentioning the Apostle Junia (Romans 16:7). The scholarship here is clear: There was one named female Apostle. See Eldon Jay Epp (2005). Junia: The First Woman Apostle. Minneapolis: Fortress Press (available on Amazon).

Then, the gospel material on St. Peter is, as would be expected, seriously selective, reinterpreted and reworked. What is lost is that the meaning of "Apostle" was being fought in the first century, and we know who won out in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. Luke carves out a view that the 12 are the only trustworthy witnesses of the Resurrection.

Luke's "twelve" is a select group and it is ONLY in Luke they are specifically chosen FROM a larger group of followers, a group not present in Mark and Matthew [see Luke 6:13]. Matthew uses the term, "apostolic" only once [10:2-5]. Mark uses it only once [6:30]. Luke uses the term 6 times in the Gospel, and 34 times in Luke-Acts. The author of Luke and Acts writes several decades after Paul and adds new requirements for apostleship, limiting it to the Twelve, excluding Paul, James the brother of Jesus, who rose to head the Jerusalem Church, and all female apostles. The restriction of "Apostle" seen in Luke-Acts is not seen in Paul. Luke downplays the functionality of the role or mission of Apostleship and makes it more symbolic.

The preeminence of Peter is not uniform across the Gospels so we can see the struggle for authority that was going on. In 4G, Jesus never specifically chooses Peter as a member of a subgroup of disciples. He does not have any special resurrection appearance until Chapter 21, which is a later add-on redaction.

Contrary to BXVI, Peter is not depicted as the first to see the Risen Christ across the Gospels. Matthew, Mark and John give prominence to Mary Magdalene. It is only in Luke that Peter is gifted with an individual appearance of the Lord [Luke 24:33-34]. In the other three Gospels, Jesus or angelic messengers send Mary Magdalene alone or with other women to proclaim the Resurrection. This is such an inconvenience to Rome that it must be obscured. So, at a minimum, the history as recounted in the canonical Gospels shows that the conflict for authority was going on in the 1st century.

If you want to see some of the available scholarship for yourself, read Ann Graham Brock (2003). Mary Magdalene, The First Apostle: The Struggle for Authority. Harvard University Press (available on Amazon). Based on her PhD dissertation at Harvard, she has very effectively demonstrated in the canonical Gospels, with supplementary non-canonical sources including the Acts of Peter and Acts of Paul, that where Peter is made prominent in the Gospels, Mary Magdalene and the other women are diminished, and vice versa.

The Apostles reads easily if you accept the underlying premises, and if you don't, the book well captures official Roman Catholic views. It is not an unbiased account of the early history of the church. There is good information in this book, but it should not be read in isolation or as an accurate picture of the first century of Christianity.

This book reprints a year's worth of Pope Benedict XVI's weekly addresses at his public audiences where he meditates on the stories of the twelve apostles, St. Paul and other early disciples of Christ. He draws lessons from these that apply to all of us. An excellent and easy read with short chapters that can be read independently.

Caveat emptor: This is the same exact content as "Jesus, The Apostles and The Early Church" published by Ignatius Press. The Ignatius Press version is printed on heavier paper and is a more well produced book for the same price. Buy that one instead! Jesus, the Apostles and the Early Church: General Audiences, 15 March 2006-14 February 2007

Better Late Than Never to read this book. As the subtitle explains, "an exclusive interview", Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger with Victoria Missouri. This text has been on my list of books to read for a long time, the fact that Cardinal Ratzinger.is now Pope Benedict XVI certainly does not diminish any of the subjects discussed in the book The interviewer appears to be a very knowledgeable Italian journalist. The book was very rewarding mainly because of the reasons given for the Church's actions or non-actions, such as the constant voicing for woman priests. This book gives the reasons why the Church has not gone down this route. The first half of the book may be a little dull but the second half involves discussions that most American Catholics feel are relevant. The book discusses Ecumenicalism, the Church's stand on Liberation Theology and what has brought on the feeling that many Catholics feel their religion is out of sync with their society. This and many more subjects are discussed.
Once read, I know this book will be kept around as a reference.

For those still naïve enough to believe that Joseph Ratzinger will at any moment herald Rome into a new age of Tradition and Catholic orthodoxy, `The Ratzinger Report' should be a disappointing yet required read. Over a period of several days, Joseph Ratzinger agreed to be interviewed by Italian journalist Vittorio Messori. The result is an interesting, although by no means startling, study for all the wrong reasons.

Joseph Ratzinger, at the time being Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, was certainly in a position to give an accurate evaluation of the state of the Roman Church; yet at times he is clearly uncomfortable with giving his analysis of the problems the Church faces, and, with the particular example of his refusal to answer specific questions regarding the Third Secret of Fatima (in clear violation of Our Lady's wishes), he unwittingly indicates that the hierarchy intends to keep Catholics in the dark regarding the severity of the crisis.

And a crisis there no doubt is within the Roman Institution; Ratzinger's tone of answers fully admit this, yet his explicit wording often displays an, albeit seemingly unenthusiastic, suggestion that sections of the Roman Church are renewing. It is these examples of a `renewing Church' such as Pentecostalism, a `deeper understanding' of Vatican II, more involvement by the laity in the New `Mass', ecumenism, and a distancing from `legalism' and `external practices', which should give greater consternation amongst faithful Catholics than if he bluntly admitted that the Roman Church is dying. Indeed, in answer to Messori's vitriolic remarks regarding Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Ratzinger curtly replied that it is impossible to `return to the past'. Ratzinger's love for the decorative beauty and, in many ways superficial, aspects of tradition is evident, but his genuine insight into spirituality is proven to be far from what his Papal garments suggest.

This, of course, should not be understood as an indictment for inaccuracy in all of Ratzinger's beliefs. As noted, in many ways Ratzinger is traditional, and the opinions that he expresses have an echo of Catholic Tradition to them. However, this unfortunately presents him as a graver danger to the souls of men Ratzinger is supposed to guide, as heresy mixed with truth is harder to discern than the blatant variety.

As a Catholic faithful to the doctrines of eternal Rome, I feel obliged to give this the lowest rating. It presents unCatholic notions as orthodox speculation, and in engages in rather wicked subterfuge concerning misguided Catholics who seek answers for what they rightfully see as a decline in Godly order. I would only recommend it to those who wish to understand the mind of `traditional Ratzinger', and glimpse at how long into the future the fight for the Church of Christ may continue.

Several years after its publication, this remains the best single introduction to the man now pope. It also would be something of a classic even had Cardinal Ratzinger not become pope. The 2 book-length interviews which followed, by Peter Seewald, are also interesting, but Messori's edges them out for its conciseness and organization, plus the fact Messori is an informed Catholic who does not have to wade through doctrinal positions unfamiliar to him.

Certainly this is sort of an elevated dialogue -- Ratzinger is, primarily, an intellectual and theologian. Every book under his name, even the few devotional ones, are in that vein and it comes with the territory. That said, he speaks as plainly and directly as he can, and -- for an upper level churchman -- is remarkably candid and does not dodge controversy. This quality, plus the fact that Ratzinger was a major player in Vatican 2 -- is what gives the book historical value with or without his recent election.

The topics covered are very wide ranging -- though most concern the state of the Catholic church, not Christian or Catholic theology in general. Overall, it might be called a report card on Vatican 2, with mixed grades. Here, Ratzinger clearly stated his continuing thesis that the council has not yet been implented properly or in its wholeness. All positions are stated rather openly and without rancor but cooly. The startling things he states thus give the reader a sort of double-take. For instance, he is convinced that civilization at present is in a grave and unprecedented crisis on many fronts, and the future hardly certain. He thus does not really echo John Paul II's motto, "Be not afraid" in every conceivable sense. In the sense of the ultimate goodness of God and the triumph of redemption afforded by Christ, sure. But on a temporal level, Ratzinger's view is that nations and peoples, at any historical moment, possess and exercise will to accept or reject those gifts. Doubtless this is a view seared into his being from having been brought up under the Nazis. And he sees disturbing general parallels to that disaster in what the entire European civilization is doing at present. His spooky discussion concerning the Fatima message only underscores this viewpoint. For afficionados of that event, his 1 and 1/2 pageworth of dry discussion of the 3rd secret prophesy, in this book, constitutes the only cogent, authoritative official description of that subject (as compared to the vision released some years later, with JP 2's interpretation attatched, and which Ratzinger's "official" and generalistic commentary --likewise very dry -- noted was not a matter of faith).

Ratzinger is no romantic. His sometimes terse observations, so casual and so comfortably delivered, can be quite numbing in their realism and impact. What is done in history is done; to the extent the council failed, for instance, it needs be remedied, but there is no going back. Thus while generally conservative in viewpoint he is no believer in "restorations" or "returns" to a prior situation. Indeed he sees the council as part and parcel of a general historical crisis in the west; deviations and mis-interpretations are not merely an intra-Catholic issue. Indeed the nature and causes of this historical crisis in western civilization is the main personal ingrediant he brings to the table.

All in all, this is a book that once read, a thoughtful reader will return to on several occasions. His papal name only doubly underscores the point of view which emerges throughout these friendly chats -- connecting the two dots (Saint Benedict, the cornerstone of western Christian civilization in his Catholic view, and Benedict XV, pope at the time of the start of its endgame) which are the most passionate focus of this otherwise -- to all outward appearances -- most urbane academician.

I have greatly enjoyed those volumes of Ratzinger's interviews that have been translated into English and published by Ignatius Press; "God and the World," "Salt of the Earth," and "The Ratzinger Report." However, I believe that with respect to the other two books, "The Ratzinger Report" falls short.

Is this an insightful book? Yes. Does this shed light on the thought of Joseph Ratzinger in the mid-80s? Yes. Is this as good as the other, later interviews? I'd argue No.

There are several factors that play a role in my opinion. The first is that this is an interview composed by a different reporter than the other two. The Second is the format in which it is written (prose vs. Q&A). The Third is the depth and length of the book. This is a much shorter volume with questions that do not delve as deep into the mind of Ratzinger as the other books.

I would recommend this book to anyone who wishes to be a formal or informal scholar of the theological and social thought of Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI). However, if you have read the other two interview books, be prepared for a significant difference.

In 1985 I was a fairly recent returnee to the Church after several years of disinterest and non-attendance. The Church in America was obviously in trouble-even I could tell that. Odd priests with strange behaviors and weird homilies. Theologians writing articles and books viciously hostile to "Rome"-they always seemed to refer to the Pope as "Rome". I eagerly looked forward to the publication of this book, and devoured it when it appeared. Alas, my pastor, an apparently grown-up man and a theologian himself, angrily, red-faced, denounced the book from the pulpit and insisted that "Rome" had no right to interfere with the teachings of the American Church. "Rome" had no knowledge of conditions and circumstances here in America and should just butt out. That's not an exact quote-it was 20 years ago, after all-but his words were very much to that effect.

Over the years I've heard that same sort of thing many, many times. It has presented me (and everyone else) with a choice. Do I follow the increasingly popular "American" way or do I follow the Pope? My choice is the latter.

This book, 20 years old as it is, puts the matter very plainly. The issues haven't changed. The dissenters in Europe and America have simply grown more subtle and evasive. I highly recommend this book if you want a thorough grounding in what the tension between "Rome" and the dissenters is all about.

I've studied the betrayal of Benedict Arnold and all those involved (mainly Major Andre) for several years. So naturally I was intrigued by this historical fiction novel and curious to see its take on this most fascinating time in our history. Well, as Major Andre was wrong to conceal the plans of West Point in his boots so was I wrong about this book. I can understand Mr. Harr wishes to use some artistic license but he is still obligated to stick to fact. One of the most jarring errors occurs in the first few pages, where several seemingly out of place letters to the author are written by three of the characters. Major David Franks' letter is addressed sometime in the early nineteenth century, this man was dead in 1793 of yellow fever! Also his information on Franks' supposed dealings after the betrayal are incorrect. He did not regain his wealth, but rather died in poverty. The way the book is written otherwise, leaves the reader with an awkward read, as though Mr. Harr has simply taken the narrative of a history book (I should know, I've read them all) and copied it over. The dialogue is painfully flat and inaccurate of the period, not that I'm saying one has to stick to heightened flowery speech at all times but modern terms should be avoided. Also it must be noted that Major Andre is portrayed as a homosexual in this novel. Again not that I find anything wrong with that artistically, but historically the man was not. If you wish to read on the true tale of Benedict Arnold I would recommend real history books opposed to this, they read much easier and contain the truth behind the actual events.

Dark Eagle reminds me of all the historical novels written by David Nevin (if you like Dark Eagle, you'll like all of Nevin's books). Harr brings history alive by adding discourse between the characters while remaining historically honest to the events of the time and making sure the language is not 21st century. Great reading and the type of book you just do not want to put down. A fun way to learn a little more history about this country.

Ok so maybe little is the wrong word to use, at 522 pages it is a weighty book. But "Dark Eagle" does an admiral job of being light and easy reading, and yet still staying true to it historical roots. I would compare the writing done by John Ensor Harr in this book to "Winter Soldiers" by Richard Ketchum. You will be left with the sense of the gray area that history includes, and the feeling that all sides of the American Revolution have been fairly represented. If I have one complaint it is that Mr. Harr choose to treat Benedict Arnold's life as being over when he switched sides, which is not the case. Benedict Arnold was a very busy and complicated man, and should been known for far more that just being a turn coat who happened to get caught.

I am a big fan of well-written historical fiction, and since most historical fiction in this country seems devoted to the Civil War, reading Dark Eagle was a refreshing change of pace. In this book, portions of the Revolutionary War come alive, in particular the Saratoga campaign, the British invasion of Philadelphia, and Arnold's treason and his botched attempt to hand over West Point to General Clinton.

I have always thought Arnold to be one of the more fascinating figures in American history. His name has become so synonymous with betrayal and treason, that any turncoat is instantly labelled a "Benedict Arnold." Harr's account tells of Arnold's rise through the ranks, his valor on the battlefield, his injuries, his shameful mistreatment by the Continental Congress with Washington unable or unwilling to help, and his ultimate betrayal. While Arnold's actions in the end inspire disdain from the reader, you can at least understand what led Benedict to his fate.

The same cannot always be said of some other characters in the book, like Horatio Gates, who comes across as pitifully inept as a general, spiteful, vain and manipulative, willing to leave Arnold's exploits completely out of his account of the Saratoga victory to deprive the wounded Arnold of his just recognition. The well-researched glimpses we get of characters like Schuyler, Burgoyne, Gates, Hamilton, Howe and others made this a worthwhile read.

However, the book is not without its problems. The novel starts out ambitiously as an attempt to tell the story of Arnold, and of the war itself, with eye-witness accounts supposedly written years later, after long reflection, by aides to Benedict Arnold and General Burgoyne. These supposed "letters" from aides such as Varick and Franks created a unique narrative tool, almost like the narrative of Burr by Gore Vidal supposedly written by Charles Schuyler years after the fact, when he knew the elderly Burr. Harr's problem here is that his choice for narrative techniques can take him only so far, (for example none of these aides spent any time in the Shippen household), and so by the middle of the novel he largely ignores them. The second half of the novel is largely a third person account of the Arnold betrayal, and the capture and punishment of John Andre, which at times seemed a little rushed.

I also would have liked a little more information regarding post-treason Arnold. Most authors,(even James Kirby Martin in his recent biography of Arnold, An American Warrior Reconsidered), give short thrift to the remainder of Arnold's career, his aggressive raids in Virginia late in the war, and his life in London afterwards. Apparently Andre was such a popular and well-liked figure, and the aborted turnover of West Point was such a disaster from the British standpoint, that the redcoats never had much use for Arnold when the West Point plan fell apart. I have yet to find a book that provides a really satisfying account of Arnold's remaining years, after that fateful attempt to send Andre behind the lines with plans for West Point hidden in his shoe.

In any event, for readers of historical fiction who want a change of pace from the Civil War novels of writers like Owen Parry and Jeffrey Shaara, there is much here to recommend. I give it 4 stars.

I would say about two months ago when I visited Amazon.com to order a book to send to a friend of mine, a recommendation popped up. The recommendation was John Ensor Harr's "Dark Eagle." I must say that the recommendation was right on the nose.

Harr's novel is a masterpiece. In brilliant strokes he painted an accurate and even-handed portrait of the American Revolution and of that tragically reviled character, Benedict Arnold.

Tragically reviled is the term of art and is so because, unless you believe in historic inevitability, his fate did not have to turn out like it did. Harr's portrayal of Arnolds wrangling with the Continental Congress provides great insight into the role and function of that body. The awe and power of Congress' issuance of the Declaration of Independence belies the fact it was an extremely weak body with very little power. The book does well to portray the struggles between Congress and Genereal Washington, between Congress and its citizens, between the newly formed States and Congress, between General Washington and the States and finally, how all of those struggles were inter-related and formed the basis and antagonism for the struggle between Washington and the British. It is against this backdrop that citizens and soldiers like Benedict Arnold had to deal with the Continental Congress and, in the case of Arnold, makes it all the more understandable why he found such difficulty in dealing with Congress.

Second, Harr's portrayal of the Continental Army's Officer Staff provides another source for Benedict Arnold's tragic fall. For those who may wonder whether General Horatio Gates truly was the destructive force for the army that John Ensor Harr made him out to be, he was. His portrayal reminds me of a line from "The Patriot" (an enjoyable, but not truly accurate depiction of the American Revolution) when Mel Gibson asked cynically, "Where's your General Gates now?" after Gates' rout in Trenton.

The intellectual fulcrum of the book actually appears towards the end of the novel: (pg. 431)

Arnold: What do they call it [changing one's allegiance]
Peggy: It depends on who wins
Arnold: What do they call it until someone wins
Peggy: They call it treason.

"They call it treason." One should always bear in mind the fact that we all accept today the proposition as true that what occured upon American soil beginning in 1775 was a revolution fought by patriots. However, in 1779 the issue was not at all clear. Had the "revolution" failed; had Congress been captured and Washington's army defeated, those same patriots who drafted the Declaration of Independence would now be judged as traitors.

"Dark Eagle" is as much historical fiction as it is a good old fashion morality play and demands that the reader make the same hard choices that Benedict Arnold made and in so doing, allows the reader to truly judge Arnold.

This is one of the best nonfiction historical books I have ever read. Jeff Benedict is able to convey to the reader the most important details regarding the birth of Foxwoods in a manner which holds the reader's attention as if you were reading a murder mystery. The role of the federal government in creating this multibillion dollar industry is clearly spelled out and incredibly well documented. Kudos to Jeff Benedict for his outstanding research and thorough investigation of the Pequots.

Yeah ..this is unfortunate that book sells so well with such a writing!! And the topic.. and so-called investigation>>> Please.. the author would not even filed his interviews! This is no investigation to me... this is populism.. that is all!!!!

I am not American , and not native american, so I guess I am neutral!
Do NOT Give this author any more money.. rather read real academic research about native casinos: such AS "INDIAN gAMING : WHO WINS" edited by Mullis and Kamper or the Eadington book about Indian Gaming and the Law!!

I hope that as readers of this book people might venture into doing research on of their own before taking the word of a man that was trying to get "funded" by a White Casino Owner in an area close enough to be affected by Fox Wood, and was trying to run for Governor?

I read this book on the suggestion of a friend. It definately is a pager turner and I couldn't put it down until I finished.

As an enrolled member of a 'casino' tribe I see why such a book would be written about a tribe rising to power through gaming. Afterall, Indians are not entitled to this type of wealth. We're supposed to reside on our little enclaves of land and be alcoholics and live close to nature and I ask why can't Indians have wealth? We didn't make the laws and neither did the Pequots. The Pequots just used the laws to their advantage and made it big. Why shouldn't the Pequots be entitled to justices of the land?

However, I can see the otherside of the fence as well. At what costs did this wealth and power come to a tribe that is suspicious of being a true Indian tribe? I'm not naive. It was all done for good purposes in the beginning, but once instant wealth came their way, all sense of what makes a tribe a tribe was lost to the bigger financial picture. The first thing that is cut when an audit happens is to cut the museum budget. The one thing that can disproove the skepticism of them being a real tribe is cut so that members can keep their pockets lined. No sense of community is in the hearts of this tribe because they'd be looking out for the welfare of the future generations.

But when reading this book, if you choose to, is to attempt to put all biases aside and see what this book (and the others written on the same topic) show...that this book does an incredible job of describing the legal and political forces in opposition to each other that led to the creation, and then to the interpretation and application of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. No other book has done a better job of illustrating the distinction between federal Indian law on the books and federal Indian law in practice than this one. It's a fascinating blueprint for how Indian tribes can leverage law, policy, and politics--if they are shrewd--to achieve an almost unimagineable degree of contemporary political and material power. The brilliance of the Pequots is that they figured out how to use white law and institutions to their particular advantage, and this book describes just how they did it. It is fascinating!! But also to Indian tribes reading this book, let this be a lesson in what NOT to do when instant wealth comes one's way.

Evidently the Pequots didn't speak with this guy. I can see why. The book is really tendentious. I'd suggest instead "Hitting The Jackpot" by a former Washington Post reporter. I heard about it in the local newspaper and it's very good. Much more informed and balanced and powerful. Whichever book you like, get educated on this!

The Chrysanthemum and the Sword describes clearly and succinctly how the Japanese lived and thought in the 1930s and 1940s. The book developed from research into Japanese society conducted for the American leadership, civilian and military, during the Second World War.

Benedict describes social customs and traditions found in Japan at the outbreak of WWII. For instance, Japanese love bathing and the eldest male gets to go first and women having their period go last; everyone uses the same water but this is no worse than everyone sharing a pool because bathers wash >>before<< getting into the tub. Another tradition is that women usually control the family purse with the husbands handing over their wages to their wives and getting an allowance. This is still largely true today.

For over ten years I avoided this book because it was written by someone who had never been to Japan and also because I avoid books that "explain" the Japanese. So when I picked up a copy lying around at a coffee shop and began skimming, I was very surprised at how insightful it was. Benedict was unable to do her research in Japan because of the war, so she obtained all her material from interviews with Japanese POWs and also with second generations Japanese-Americans interned in American concentration camps.

It is still worth reading today. Things have changed in Japan, as they have everywhere else in the world, but her people are still basically the same.

This classic of anthropology commissioned as a study by US military during WWII and completed after the war was over, is a remarkable study of Japanese ethos. Benedict had no direct access to the culture of Japan because of the war situation, so she uses historical, literary, anecdotal data to construct the ethos of Japan and explain why Japanese fight so hard and surrender without hatred, why they dislike anyone showing them a favour, and why they went to war till the emperor chose peace.

She bases the bulk of her analysis on the concepts of Japanese 'indebtedness' - giri and gimu. She states that Japanese do not follow a fixed catalog of common values nor do they have a fixed idea of character but have clear cut ideas about the hierarchy of duties based on the Japanese social structure.

These duties make life very hard for an average Japanese person, but they bear it, because clearing the debt is very important for a Japanese. And debt includes debt to one's name, which is cleared through revenge in the Samurai tradition.

Benedict's analysis correctly explains why the Japanese sought to conquer and rule other countries, why they fought so hard and bitterly, and yet accepted peace so easily.

It also explains much that happened after the book was written - the rise of Japanese industry, management and technology. Japan cleared the debt to its name (due to its loss in war) through commerce.

Her other insights are generally in harmony with other writers on Japan from management theorists explaining Japanese personnel culture to cultural theorists like Geert Hofstede, who rate Japan as the most masculine of all cultures.

While I lived four years in Japan, I read many cultural books. Most authors referenced the work done by Ruth Benedict. It's my understanding that the military needed her ideas about the enemy to help win the war, and to effectively occupy Japan following WWII.
Japanese survivors from WWII have universally told me that American soldiers, following the war, were very kind, respectful, honorable, and helpful to the poor, defeated Japanese in their home country. They seemed genuinely interested in getting Japan back on its feet, and today's elderly Japanese feel a great respect and indebtedness towards those occupying forces from America.
American occupying policy was put together fairly quickly. Decisions were made, including whether and in what form the Emperorship should continue. A cornerstone for guiding these decisions was Ruth Benedict's book, "The Crysanthemum and the Sword."
Steps taken and structures put in place by America in post-war Japan were consistent, well-thought, and extraordinarily successful.
As Americans, we really needed a Ruth Benedict to analyze Iraq and inspire our leaders to put together an occupying strategy there that would acknowledge the strengths of Iraqui culture and re-shape them for success. Instead, we seem not to have a clear plan of who Iraq is or what to do with them.
How could we have done so well in the 40's and so poorly now?
Anyway, read Ruth Benedict's remarkable book and marvel at the skill of her analysis.

While this book covers many aspects of Japanese culture and behavior, making some of the seminal distinctions (e.g. shame v. guilt culture), it also adds up to a misleading picture in my opinion. Beautifully written, Benedict throws around abstractions and generalizations that I found added up to mythmaking, and ultimately popularised misleading notions about the honor, dignity, etc.

Perhaps I have a skewed view, having lived in Japan when many thought it permanently at the pinnacle of the capitalist world (how quaint does that seem today?), but I saw virtually none of the stuff that Benedict claims is the underlieing reality of life there. I would guess that, since she did not live in Japan and do her work on-site, it was inevitable that she constructed an ideal world and hence ignored the banalities and ugliness that I witnessed every day there. All the stuff about Samarai codes and delicate intimacies, in my opinion, are peripheral - to be sure, they can be found, but the everyday reality there is far darker, far bleaker, than this study implies.

As such, this book reflects about as much reality in Japan as Disney or the cartoon Rex Morgan would for the US. It obscures as much as it illuminates and a lot of people have wasted time trying to base their understanding on it rather than what their eyes told them. There is far less underneath than we would care to admit - perhaps, just perhaps, Japan is as ugly as it appears.

Those reviewers saying that this book is outdated have obviously never "set foot in Japan" (as one reviewer criticizes the author). Even though I have dozens of friends who live and work in Japan while loving, laughing, crying and living with Japanese, there are still some things about Japanese behavior and society that utterly confuse us as a group. Many Japanese of today who participate in our discussions are also unable to satisfactorily explain their way of thinking to us.

To my surprise, several of these mysteries were explained in great detail here, in a book several decades old! As many students of sociology know, societal change takes time. While Japan's advancement has been remarkably fast, the motivations and analyses laid out in this book still apply to most Japanese today. At the very least, they form the bedrock of the convictions for the middle-aged Japanese of today who dictate political and social policy in the power circles of Japan.

This book is value not only because of how it showcases differences (this is done only for illustrative purposes) but for how it defines and contrasts the Japanese way with what we know, and in doing so allows us to understand them to a higher degree. Very highly recommended.

Allen did a lot of researching and veryfying for this book; he provides a lot of information not previously known, such as which other Cardinals were serious contenders, and other tidbits of the Conclave.

The editing is poor, however, in that Allen repeats the same details numerous times, and that this book is about Benedict XVI, but when you're into practically 25% of the book, it said virtually nothing about Ratzinger. The whole beginning section is dedicated to John Paul II.

Yes, John Paul was a magnificent figure, and he is loved and missed by all, and you cannot help but compare the current pope to the last one; but that much written of John Paul does not belong in a book about Benedict XVI. Granted, John Paul's papacy and death did effect the outcome of the 2005 Conclave, such as Cardinal Ratzinger's good handling of the Interregnum and funeral, which attracted many of the Cardinals to vote for him. But in a book about Benedict XVI, attention to John Paul II should be much more limited than.

On the plus side, though, details about the last few months of John Paul's life are extensively discussed in this book, going into how ill the Pope was. That's something a lot of people, including myself, have been looking for.

It is obvious that they rushed to put this book out, and the editors didn't really put much time into making sure that it was well-structured. Nevertheless, this book is rich in content, and a great deal of the information he gives cannot be found anywhere else.

John Allen is 'our man inside the Vatican'. He knows how, and he knows when and why. The book looks back at the last days of Pope John Paul II and his legacy.
It then goes on to tell the story of the conclave.
The journalist John Allen looks ahead at the tenure of Pope Benedict XVI: he informs us on the Pontiff's long term vistas and goals, on how he sees his tenure and what the implications will be; not just from a religious point of view, but also how his role will influence the political, cultural and historical aspects of our world.

Allen details the rise of Joseph Ratzinger of Germany into the papacy. As Pope John Paul II's right hand man, Benedict is probably one of the more knowledgeable and intelligent men to come into the office of Pope. His challenges are immense, such as the secularity of Europe, the poverty of the south, and the sex abuse cases in the United States. However, this is a man who brings a wealth of experience to these daunting challenges. Ratzinger is considered a conservative member of the College of Cardinals, so being considered a moderator in his new role may help him assume some of these challenges.

This is an interesting read. Allen tries to summarize some of the new Pope's writings on beliefs, and some of this material is hard to understand (concept of relativism). One gets a flavor of what the new Pope will be like. However only time will tell on how the world views Pope Benedict XVI.

This is a quickie book of reportage on the Vatican conclave which elected Joseph Ratzinger to be the new pope. The many interviews with cardinals on deep background that are woven into the story are most enlightening.

The account of John Paul II's final weeks is good. One is stirred anew at the impression of the sheer greatness of this man on his flock. The potted biography of Ratzinger is fine, but the long section of predictions on what Benedict will do must quickly become obsolete, as he actually progresses with his reign.

Mr. Allen's book, Conclave, is an insightful look into how the Catholic Church chooses its pope. The weakness of Conclave is that it was written some years before the death of Pope John Paul so that some of its predictions & conclusions are a little dated, though its descriptions of the process remain useful. Now we have The Rise of Benedict XVI, a book on the election of John Cardinal Ratzinger to the Chair of St. Peter. Coming mere months after the events it describes, timing again becomes a strength and a weakness of Mr. Allen's work.

In many ways, this book is a sequel to Conclave. It glosses over the procedures of conclave, which Mr. Allen covered in more detail in his earlier book, but he is more specific in this volume as to who actually did what as the events unfolded. He has also updated his discussion of many of the issues that face the Church; most notably in his presentation of the child abuse scandal that has rocked the Church in the past few years.

In essence, this book is a history of the Vatican in the first six months of 2005. Clearly an insider, Mr. Allen offers a detailed view of why Cardinal Ratzinger was chosen as the new pope. He gives a decent, if not terribly in depth, biography of Ratzinger and gives a fair discussion of the challenges that await Benedict XVI. Best of all, he takes a balanced view of this watchdog of Catholic theology. Many progressive Catholics are worried about where Benedict may lead the Church. Mr. Allen acknowledges this but reminds us of an important point: it is impossible to predict how anyone will ultimately react to sitting in the big chair. We need to be patient an open-minded.

We need to be the same with this book, which was obviously assembled in haste and impatience. It's a bit repetitive in spots, probably from a lack of time for serious editing. And the lack of an index is an obvious flaw. Still, as a snapshot of the moment, it is impressive. It will be interesting to look back at this book at the end of Benedict's reign and see how well Mr. Allen foresaw things.