Bloom Books

Vonnegut's novel takes the reader into the myriad faces of human emotions--from disenchantment to awe, skepticism to empathy, from horror and madness to succor and redemption. This dryly humorous and unforgivingly scathing story of the seemingly inevitable tendency of humans to think up of ways to destroy themselves, or, simply, to make complete wretches of their lives, is at times too incredulous to be taken seriously, and yet the author has managed to slip in some amazingly straightforward insights people nowadays would probably hardly acknowledge readily, too preoccupied we are with the superfluous things in life.

I certainly enjoyed Cat's Cradle with its memorable zany characters, unashamed views on tolerance, hypocrisy, and even religion. It takes a jab at the senselessness of war, the farcical stage that is politics, and ponders the possibility that life can be lived so simply but it seems that that idea for us nowadays is too complex to grasp.

Makes the reader sit back and think while still helplessly embroiled in the world of "Bokononism" and the twists and turns of fate the narrator was dealt with. A veritable tour de force.

This is a great introductory book for those who want to try science fiction but don't want to get too deeply into robots and alien visitations. It's just a great yarn, like any classic novel: a story that will hold your interest because it's more fun than your life.

A free-lance journalist, researching material for his book: The Day the World Ended, tracks down the family of the father of the atom bomb. His quest takes him to a banana republic where he meets the love of his life and magically becomes El Presidente. But he gets more than he asked for when he comes face-to-face with Ice-Nine.

Vonnegut, who witnessed the horror of the Dresden fire-bombing, takes us on a light-hearted romp through the madness of mankind. He challenges us with wry humor, zany characters and a half-baked religion. Do we really know or do we only think we know?

Cat's Cradle has become ever more relevant over the years.

This is a great book that everyone should read. One thing I especially loved about this book is that it's addicting and a very easy read. The chapters are very short, but it works nicely, and this makes it a fast and easy read that makes you want to go on to the next chapter.

The cat's cradle is an extraordinary tale about the extent of human limitations when incompatibilities exist between the goals of science and humanity. Vonnegut created another masterpiece that describes the dangers of human science when mixed with their desires and lewdness.

John, the narrator, is writing a book about the day the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, and in the process of his research discovers the life of Felix Hoenikker, the Nobel prize-winning physicist and one of the creators of the atomic bomb.

Similar to walking through a hilarious human maze, we are taken to San Lorenzo; a town were Hoenikker's two sons and daughter live and ignorantly use their father's last invention causing another world wide human disaster.
Vonnegut brilliantly shows human limitations and foolishness with his description of an imaginary religion called Bokononism, which originated and blossomed in San Lorenzo.

Vonnegut, who survived the cruelty of war and faced life's emptiness, is one of the few writers who can laugh at the human inability to reconcile the inherent conflict of science's power and capabilities with the needs and limitations of humanity.

I picked up this book by chance, was shocked almost from page 1, but could hardly bear to put it down for a moment. When it was over I felt limp, bruised and my eyeballs were throbbing.

The grandiose Biblical style with its Semitic constructions (dissimilar items linked with "and" and "and") looks all set up to fall flat on its face, and yet is miraculously sustained without a seam: terse and eloquent, dark and shining.

McCarthy's vision of the Old West as a vast moral Void where all traces of inherited meaning are lost and the compass spins insanely in all directions, where the most atrocious violence happens with a curious soundlessness as if in a vacuum, is horribly compelling and changes forever the way you think about American history. It's as though designed to illustrate William Carlos Williams' lines "The pure products of America/ go crazy".

This book has been compared to "Moby Dick", but in certain ways it's better. "Moby Dick", a wonderful book, does have its longueurs and awkward spots. "Blood Meridian" has none. It does what poetry tries but often fails to do. As a baroque, operatic, Cinemascope vision of anarchy, nihilism and the blood-soaked insanity of history, it is unsurpassed and probably unsurpassable. If I had read it at 15 it would still be giving me nightmares.

I read this in 2001, at the suggestion of a good friend, and completely enjoyed the book. It's pretty dark, but is a compelling tale of a man's journey in the old west. I especially enjoyed the sinister character that keeps re-appearing and could be more than just a man.. seems like the same character turns up in lots of Cormac McCarthy's books. Overall, I would recommend this book

In addition to watching the recent movie No Country for Old Men and reading The Road, I thought I'd explore Cormac McCarthy more deeply by reading his novel Blood Meridian. I'd heard about it from friends and intrigued for a good story, I dove in. Thrown in is more appropriate, like an infant into the deep end of the pool, from atop the high dive while held by a seven-foot-tall, four-hundred pound freakshow delicately bouncing upon the board to get as much leverage as insanely possible. The atomic splat of sentience that resulted after reading the work brought a self-awareness that I now have truly entered McCarthy's world in as much as his writing syntax will allow.

Which is an exquisite thing. Blood Meridian is an astounding work that spans styles and genres, from the most erudite works of literature, to historical fiction, to sheer horror. It takes a story, an era (the old West) that has been fantasized and romanticized to the point of nausea, and recreates it for what it most likely approximated in my opinion...unbridled lawlessness, havoc and murder.

Blood Meridian is a work depicting immense violence, detailing the events surrounding the escapades of a young character called 'the kid', as he makes his way westward from Tennessee around the year 1848. He wanders purposelessly until faced with the prospect of adventure in joining a band of scalp hunters destined for the American Southwest. Initially starting with a more specific objective, the band's purpose slowly embraces the means rather than the end, under the direction of their leaders Captain Glanton and Holden, more commonly known as 'the judge'; the band consequently sweeps across the southwest deserts and mountains in a sandstorm of terror, through Texas, Mexico, California and all places in between.

Though without glorifying war, McCarthy's style of writing leaves no detail of atrocity untold. The extent to which he elaborates on brutality and chaos reifies his more or less consistent theme of society's lack of morality, or at least the laughable facade of law and order. Which leads a reader to believe that this work is just as much a philosophical offering as it is one of fiction. That there are those among us who can manipulate situations and people to the extent as one particular character does in this story is the most frightening aspect. His insistence that existence of something requires someone else's consent is a highly disturbing credo and is the underlying current to the justification of events as they progress.

In any case, that violence is eternal is but one aspect and message of Blood Meridian that's thoroughly thought provoking and engrossing and bizarre and frightening. Read it, if you get the chance.

In my mind, this is beyond doubt the best of McCarthy, better even than All the Pretty Horses. McCarthy creates a vivid, if disturbing, portrait of the American West, leaving the reader thinking about humanity at the end. The conclusion, which I will not spoil for the reader, is equally powerful, and in my mind rivals even the intriguing speech by Sheriff Bell at the end of No Country for Old Men. For anyone who enjoys Hemingway or Faulkner, or who enjoyed other books of McCarthy's, this is a must-read.

This is the third Cormac McCarthy book I've read. I read "The Road" first, then "No Country for Old Men" and now this book. It's not an easy read, it does require concentration and there was quite a bit of vocabulary in the book that was new to me as its set in the mid 1800s...but I have to say I loved it. It's of course very violent and a "dark" story, but I've never read anyone who writes like Cormac McCarthy. You find yourself re-reading passages he's written just because they are so beautifully and poetically crafted. I think he is officially my favorite writer. Definately a good read, I highly recommend it.

This is a truly outstanding book. You don't have to like or agree with Malcolm X to learn from it. Martin Luther King Jr. was undoubtedly the more effective civil rights leader, and King's thought in many ways is more profound. But without Malcolm X, the true depth and meaning of the black American experience cannot be fully grasped, with all the brutality of racism - the injustice delivered in a land where democracy is promised. Malcolm X did tell it like it is - he lived and told the story of the black man's justifiable rage and disappointment. This book tells of Malcolm's own life of disillusionment - first with the life of crime, then with the Nation of Islam and Elijah Muhammad, until finally at the end of his life the deeper meaning of his Muslim religion and of racial justice began to dawn upon him. Tragically he was gunned down before he could remake the image of a militant black man, which twelve years of service in the Nation of Islam had given him. Malcolm X was an extraordinary man, and has truly a remarkable tale to be told. To remove the scars of racism, the reading and understanding of this book should be an essential journey towards bettering race relations, and alleviating racial misunderstanding. Obviously Malcolm was not right about everything, and confesses his own wrongs. But he also points quite vividly to the wrongs he faced as an African-American.

Along with 'Souls of Black Folk'-W.E.B. DuBois, 'Invisible Man'-Ralph Ellison, and 'Visions for Black Men'-Naim Akbar...this book is required reading for all African men in America, as well as any other persons serious about getting past the 'race' question that continues to plague us as a nation.

first off i want to thank malcolm x for his thoughts on race after visiting mecca.he saw that persons of all races got together to worship and were colorblind.i will see this man in heaven he saw past racism in america to be a great christian!also i would like to give a big F to public schools in america for not teaching everything about slavery and who was involved,for example it wasn't until i went to college to major in history that i learned the truth about slavery.the white man didn't just go to africa with a big gun and round up black people as slaves,they established trade with the local tribes who traded goods with tribal leaders who had their own slaves as spoils of war and traded them with the white man as just another trade good so the tribes that traded were africans tradeing off other africans to the white's.try to find this in high school history or elementary school history,not likely.it is true that some white slave owners treated slaves horribly and i'm sure african tribes even treated some of their slaves horribly also.wrong is wrong no matter what your skin looks like!slavery is wrong!racism is wrong!!!!! ! ! "everyone" should be able to live free and should be able to worship freely and have pride in their people without being called racist! i'm guilty of being white, i love my race,does this make me a racist! no i don't think so. LOVE,RED

I read this book along time ago and still retain alot of what I learned from it. There is no beating around the bush in this from the beginning he tells of his life as it happened. He tells of an early career in crime to his time in prison and he does not attempt to sugarcoat anything. He does explain his reasoning for having done what he had done in his youth, but he does not claim to be innocent.
He did manage to find a better way to fight his enemies during his incarceration, and anyone who has ever seen any footage of Malcolm X will understand what I mean. The man was a very acticulate and confrontational speaker. He was the spark that ignited the engine of the civil rights movement in many respects. The civil rights movement began as far back as pre-civil war and was slow to develop with minor progress for each generation. Malcolm was the man brave enough to say enough and to make his voice heard over the many voices of the nation that tried to rise over him.
Here is a man that took it upon himself to correct a society that had become accepting of the crimes of their ancestors and simply ignored them. It is only a stonesthrow back in time if you think about it and yet it is painful to imagine people could be so cruel.
I recommend this to anyone who hasn't read it as it is an excellent book and is a document of the life of a man who managed to play a pivotal role in changing the way America viewed itself.

Despite the dispiriting revelation that this book was almost totally written by Alex Haley, "The Autobiography of Malcolm X" remains one of my favorite books. Which is a little strange, since his well-known struggles with civil rights, the police, Black identity, and Islam have little or no relevance to my life. Sorry.

The part of this book that affects me most deeply is where Malcolm is in prison educating himself, studying on the floor of his cell in the dim night light. I can't think of another tale about the birth of an autodidact and the rewards of reading that is as uplifting and memorable as Malcolm's. I first read this book about twenty years ago, and that's the part that always sticks with me: the power of books to change your life, regardless of who you are or what you've done. And much of the rest sticks with me too, for example the poignant case of "West Indian Archie."

I would like to advise, however, that you buy this edition: Autobiography of Malcolm X (Penguin Modern Classics), rather than the Ballantine edition, as the binding on the latter has proven unreliable, to say the least. I have gone through three different copies of the Ballantine edition of Malcolm X and the binding has fallen apart on all three of them -- to the point where the covers have come completely off, even though I don't really mistreat books. It can't just be bad luck.

Malcolm X was said to have been a formidable debater, yet it's curious to me that none of his opponents ever made the obvious, unanswerable point: that whatever crimes and horrors the West can be charged with vis-à-vis the African slave trade, those of Islam have been even more extensive and blood-soaked. They go back a lot further, and continued a lot later. In fact, it was only two years previous to Malcolm's making his Hajj to Mecca (1964) that slavery was made illegal in Saudi Arabia!

Hence jettisoning Christianity and Western culture for the supposed moral high ground of Islam was, when you think about it, a dingy move on Malcolm's part. Yet it is, unfortunately, the entirety of his position.

But you'll find this book a cracking good read nonetheless.

Honestly, this book is a bitter pill to swallow. It's written beautifully and was a real ground breaker for the realist movement, but the subject matter is incredibly tragic. I found it hard to keep reading as Emma continuously dug herself deeper into trouble, dragging her innocent, loving, and devoted family down with her. It is an incredible moral lesson that is still relevant today: "The Grass is Never Greener on the Other Side." Naturally, I found Emma incredibly dislikeable because she was lazy, melodramatic, arrogant, ignorant, and had this air of entitlement that made me want to slap her. But I did feel sorry for her because she was so caught up in this sense of romanticism, she couldn't see straight. Because of her obsession with passion, the choices she made seemed so predictable, and all you could do was watch it happen like a train wreck in slow motion. I loved how Flaubert mixed the mundane with the romantic in his writing. And I loved the bitter ironies he used, too (especially at the end of the story). I think the reader can gain alot from reading this book to this day. It's unapologetic, yet beautiful.

Like so many of the classics, Madame Bovary does an incredible job of recording humanity. All of the characters are whole, full-fleshed and individual. Emma's discontent with life, her yearning for something more, has probably been experienced by all of us. Her yearning destroys her, and her husband, but teaches us about ourselves along the way. The reason I love this book, and many of the other classics, is that the characters don't always have reasons, they think and behave erratically, sometimes logically, sometimes foolishly, just like real people.

Emma is a typical unrealistic romantic girl, who sees love as the solution to all her problems and the answer to all her dreams of wealth and fame. Emma finds married life and attending expensive parties as the doctor's wife very disappointing. She compares herself to the wealthy people at these parties and becomes very depressed and angry at her husband for not fulfilling her dreams of wealth and fame. Emma becomes the center of the story when she begins her adulterous love affairs in an attempt to bring passion, romance and fulfillment to her empty life. At the end, faced with the emptiness of her fantasies, Emma, makes a tragic decision still hoping for a romantic ending, but that goes badly as well

Even motherhood was disappointing for Emma, as she had hoped for a boy but gave birth to a girl Many of Emma's actions were compulsive in every way and her interaction with her little girl was obviously cruel and selfish.
Emma couldn't see the reality of any person in her life; she over estimated the passion of her lovers, even the sexual attraction between her and Rodolph got cold, even the pleasure of overspending money didn't last. Her husband and child, the only people true to her, were in front of her all of her life but she didn't see it. Was the reason again the hunter/prey nature of human beings? If Charles didn't give her unconditional love, would she not notice his love like she did? If she wasn't that cruel, would Charles idolize her like he did? Are the people who live their lives unnoticed like Charels destined to be like that for the rest of their lives? If Charles had known the true Emma from the beginning, wouldn't he still love her as much and do whatever she wanted to please her?

I don't know about all the emotional conflicts of human beings, but I know that Flaubert was an artist who presented his obnoxious character Emma in a fascinating and very readable way..
Eight years ago, and again recently, I was unable to put the book down until I finished reading it..

This is a very well written novel. It deserves its high status in the cannon of world literature. The most unique and surprising thing about this novel is that it seems to be so timely and modern. Though it was written long before our consumer driven culture of debt, it seems to understand these issues is a weirdly foretelling way. I was an English literature major in college so I was exposed to many fiction works from the time period of Madame Bovary, but I have never read such a modern novel from that time. Maybe Flaubert had a time machine?

I probably disliked this novel as much as I did 'Sons and Lovers'. For a while I just thought I'd been reading too many French writers (Huysmans, Sand,....) but it was much deeper than that.

Although Madame Bovary is the central character, and an intriguing one at that, I don't believe that she is any more than a vehicle for Flaubert to vent his virtiole against men. There are four principle male characters in this novel and we see them reflected and caricatured in their responses to mixed-up, not altogether lovable Emma.

There is husband Charles who is overwhelmed by the love he feels from Emma - he sees himself as SO lucky. But he is blind - seeing none of Emma's distress, or philandering. And he is not very successful at what he does anyway.

Then there is lover Rodolphe. He is the ultimate selfish prig of a man. He reflects, as he walks away from Emma - having raised her hopes of a new more exciting life - that she was a wonderful mistress but he couldn't possibly compromise his selected way of life. Not for any woman, no matter how rewarding she might be. And when she appeals to him for help, she gets nothing from him.

The second lover, Leon, is a more youthful and inexperienced participant in Emma's life. But later he does marry (not Emma, of course) so it is not commitment he shies away from. Nevertheless he fails Emma.

Finally there is the chemist Homais, Charles's 'colleague'. He also has no sensitivity to Emma, almost misses seeing her at all. Like Charles, he is unsuccessful in some of his ventures, but he has such comically grand illusions about himself.

All four men exhibit fundamental flaws. For me Charles and Leon have some saving graces. But none of them I have much sympathy for.

And then there is the matter of Emma's decline - not due to her affairs. Was Flaubert unable to undermine Emma because of the affairs, because of Emma's selfish self-seeking? Did he have to create other artifices to inflict upon her - and the men around her (not that Homais really notices) - to give the story a 'moral'?

The writing is spectacular - Flaubert was a wonderful observer and expresser of ideas. But for me, good writing is more than observation and a facility with words. It is the structure of the novel that failed me.

Even though the characters in Uncle Tom's Cabin are "fictional", the story is realistic about American slavery during the life of Harriet Beecher Stowe. Uncle Tom's Cabin met a great deal of resistance in the south, because it exposed the skeleton in America's closet. Abraham Lincoln said to the Stowe...."so you're the little lady who started the great war". Stowe is not an impressive novelist; her writing lacks literary style. But that doesn't matter. Stowe is recognized for her courage to confront the world with a frank and uninhibited portrayal of American slavery.

I jumped into this book mainly to work on reading lists that i had seen it appear on. I did have the vague idea that most people do of what it is about, but would of been hard pressed to really give any serious detail of the story before hand. So after a little research i jumped in, and this was my experience.
While the novel overall was good, i must admit that I was very glad when it was finally finished. The tale follows several different characters and the different fates that they have according to the choices they have made. The characters are very well drawn out, although today many would be considered somewhat stock. I think it will be a long time before I forget Tom, Eva, or St.Clare for instance. The tale does set up a brillant bit of emotional drama, and brings forth a moral tale in such a way i'm almost shocked that it was so popular. In today's society I can't imagine that a story with such strong overtone's would be successful. The writing today is still clear and fairly easy to read. The quality of the prose and the sentances to have their moments as well. Sometimes the religion and the moralizing does come on very strongly, but along with the sentimentalness one can forgive the author when realizing the massive evil insitution she was facing.
This is probably not a book that the average reader will read for kicks. However, from a literary and historical perspective it is quite great. It is slightly scary to imagine where the world would have been without it as well.

1. SLAVERY WASN'T SO BAD AFTER ALL. I was surprised to find out that this book supported slavery. Of course, you have to wade through the melodrama and Christian speechifying -- about 95% of the book -- to get at Ms Stowe's thesis, but once you do it becomes clear. To Ms Stowe, slavery and capitalism are just different manifestations of evil human greed (St. Claire's speech, pp 239-241 in my edition). Old slavers who whipped their charges to death must be smiling now, knowing that they're being compared to the Rockefellers, Carnegies, and Bill Gates.

Ms Stowe deems many factors that separate capitalism and slavery to be irrelevant. The fact that under capitalism families weren't separated is irrelevant. The fact that people could emigrate freely is also irrelevant. The fact that people were not forced off their farms and into the cities is irrelevant. The fact that proletariat, even in Ms Stowe's day, were protected by labor laws is irrelevant. The fact that life expectancy for the proletariat increased vis à vis farmers is irrelevant. The fact that the proletariat were not chosen for racist reasons is irrelevant. The fact that a worker could become an entrepreneur and eventually a capitalist is also irrelevant.

2. CHRISTIANITY DOESN'T CONDEMN SLAVERY. Ms Stowe does a fine job (inadvertently) of showing that Christianity contains doctrine that supports slavery, and no doctrine that outright condemns it.

3. AMERICA IS FOR AMERICAN INDIANS. Ms Stowe states at the end of chapter 43 that Topsy, after receiving a decent Christian upbringing, became a teacher in "her own country" -- Africa. Ms Stowe believes that Africa is Topsy's country because she is descended from Africans, and conversely that the United States is not Topsy's country. Of course, if one were to apply the same logic to everyone in the U.S., only native Americans would pass the test. Pack your bags everyone!

This novel delivers the truth of the horrifying effects of slavery on both the slave and the master; delivering the message that slavery is damaging to society as a whole. 'Uncle Tom's Cabin' is a historic classic but it is also very relevant for today. I believe this novel should be read by everyone so that slavery will always be understood as a terrible and frightening condition that affects entire societies. Also, 'Uncle Tom's Cabin' is not a difficult read; the writing feels fresh and it is truly a page-turner.

For whatever reasons, I'm one of those who, over the years, never gave "Uncle Tom's Cabin" much thought. I'm afraid I dismissed the book based on the derogatory cliche of describing a complacent black man as an Uncle Tom. What a pleasure to find how wrong I was.

Although the style of narration, the punctuation style of the day and the evolution of contractions, compound words and other bits of syntax show this book to be from the mid 1800s, "Uncle Tom's Cabin" is a modern novel. It is largely without the stifling level of detail offered in other books of the time, and it pushes the concept of omniscient narrator (perhaps along the lines of Vonnegut in "Breakfast of Champions") to a level that would likely be absurd in another story and purpose.

And Harriet Beecher Stowe did have a purpose - a daring, countervailing, completely forward-thinking challenge to the complacency of the day. The action of the story concludes in the second-to-last chapter. In the last chapter, called simply "Concluding Remarks," Stowe, referring to herself in third person, explains how she came to write the book, and in so doing pulls the reader beyond the realm of fiction in order to cap off her sermon. And a 500-page sermon is exactly what "Uncle Tom's Cabin" was and is.

To quote Stowe from the last chapter, "For many years of her life, the author avoided all reading upon or allusion to the subject of slavery, considering it as too painful to be inquired into, and one which advancing light and civilization would certainly live down. But, since the legislative act of 1850, when she heard, with perfect surprise and consternation, Christian and humane people actually recommending the remanding escaped fugitives into slavery, as a duty binding on good citizens,- when she heard, on all hands, from kind compassionate and estimable people, in the free states of the North, deliberation and discussions as to what Christian duty could be on his head,- she could only think, These men and Christians cannot know what slavery is; if they did, such a question could never be open for discussion. And from this arose a desire to exhibit it in a LIVING DRAMATIC REALITY [emphasis the author's]. She has endeavored to show it fairly, in the best and worst phases. In its BEST [emphasis the author's] aspect, she has, perhaps, been successful; but, oh! Who shall say what yet remains untold in that valley and shadow of death, that lies the other side?"


Within the narrative arts can be found a gray area between complete fiction and straightforwrad documenting. Within this area itself is a fine line of storytelling that sheds the fluff factor of fiction and the yawn factor of documentation. A story told along this line is not only compelling but offers to the receiver of the story a glimpse of what a life in the world depicted by the story must have been like. Or at the very least might have been like. This glimpse, whatever else it is, will be visceral, allowing the reader an actual emotional link. Finding this line is hard, staying on it harder and pulling off a finished work while remaining true to the line harder still. This is what Stowe did, a century before such a point of view emerged again in Americam media.

As such, Stowe explains that many of the characters are based on real people - yes, there really was a man as horrible as Simon Legree - and that most of the events in the book were based on true events known to her personally or through trusted reporting. This novelizing of reality was so compelling the book would be translated into twenty-two languages.


It would be relatively easy to take sentences and paragraphs out of context and reach the conclusion that Stowe decried slavery while holding the black race paternalistically. It's very possible to find any number of passages and label them as apologetic and paternalistic. There is, in fact, paternalism throughout the story, but this is a reflection of America ten years before the Civil War; and by the end of Stowe's "Concluding Remarks" this paternalism is gone.

I would describe the main apologist, St. Clare, who is keenly aware of the state of his own culture, as more of a rationalist. By making this character so, Stowe is able to open our eyes, as she opened many eyes of the day, to the subtler forms of defacto slavry - not at all to excuse slavery in general as some kind of natural order, but to bear witness to those toiling in other forms of captured work.

In 1851 the scullery maid of an English country home was not a slave, of course. Her employment was voluntary, after all, and at the end of a year she would have a few schillings to her name. But economically, perhaps even geographically, her freedom was largely unavailable to her, and so while not a slave under the law, the other side of her employment was the delivery of herself to twelve- or fifteen-hour days of scrubbing pots and pans. The delivery of herself to, at the end of any of those days, climbing three or four flights of a rear stairs to a garret; to a social life limited to the kitchen staff, which itself was a hierarchy that lorded over her; to little hope of marriage, if that's what she wanted, or to any sort of a life she might call her own. Why? To keep from starving to death.

And think about this today. Are you watching a 27" color TV with full remote that cost $199? Do you honestly think that set could have been made, boxed, shipped to a port in Asia, shipped by boat to the US, shipped by train and truck to your local StuffMart and sold to you profitably for one or two day's wages while every worker along the way was treated fairly? Do you care?


For the vast majority of those reading this review slavery is an abstracted and distant topic. It is a practice from a long ago past that might be given two meetings in a high school American History class, a cursory survey from which students might understand the concept of the economics of buying, selling and breeding human beings, from which they might be encouraged to imagine the suffering implicit to such practices.

Stowe's great achievment in writing "Uncle Tom's Cabin" was to belie the nuts and bolts, the mere logistics and schematics of slavery. She established for the reader the point of view of the slave, of a human life set against the legally sanctioned bureaucracy of slavery. She successfully depicted a person - an individual, a human being - sold as a product, warehoused as a product, transported as a product, and then set to use as an organic machine that was discarded and replaced when it broke. More to the point, she allows us glimpses into the inner lives, thoughts and prayers of those sold, warehoused, transported and used up while their ties to family and place, while their smallest hopes, are given credence only as an afterthought that may never coalesce. Only if, after having purchased a brother or a mother, there should be enough money remaining to buy the sister or the child. Only if it should be convenient and expedient for the planter to do so, only if it should strike that planter's fancy one particular afternoon but
not another.

This book is as meaningful today, in new ways, as it was in 1851, and that is wholly remarkable.

It was a very enjoyable read! I didn't want to put the book down. I would have liked to have seen a little more interaction between Caspian and Peter, and a more detailed battle sequence at the end.

Prince Caspian is one of the tales of The Chronicles of Narnia. It takes place after Peter, the high king and his siblings left the kingdom many years before. They returned to find animosity between the realms of prince Caspian and the magical creatures. A knight called Reepicheep that is a talking mouse, a dwarf and the cast off prince find themselves on the same side as the high king Peter and his siblings. After they learn to trust each other, they unite to bring peace to all races and the throne to his rightful heir. A great tale full of action.
Anna del C.
Author of "The Elf and the Princess"
The Elf and The Princess: The Silent Warrior Trilogy - Book One (The Silent Warrior Trilogy)

I saw the movie first, and I believe that was a mistake. Because once I sat down to read this book, I was expecting the movie to follow the book. I was, of course, wrong.

To read this book, I believe you got to have somewhat of an open mind and be imaginative. The Kings and Queens come back, and they come back many years later. The last time they left Narnia, they were much older...like young adults, and they come back in this book as children again. Narnia has changed and has changed for the worse. But the children, Prince Caspian, and the other Narnians fight to set things right.

Aslan is not throughout the book, but shows up just in time. But I must admit that I was sad to read that Peter and Susan could not come back because they were too old, and the same time, I completely understood why.

Overall, this was an excellent read, and C.S. Lewis writing is such a treasure. But this one was the book I liked the least out of all the books in the series. I guess the movie did ruin it for me.

Thanks.

Imagine if you once saved a magical other world... only to return later and find that centuries had passed, and everything had changed.

Well, since the movie adaptation of "Prince Caspian" is about to come out, it seems appropriate to revisit C.S. Lewis's classic novel, the sequel to his even more classic "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe." While it has some drippily allegorical moments near the end, Lewis does a pretty good job with what must have been a difficult sequel.

When his aunt gives birth to a baby boy, young Prince Caspian finds himself on the run from his usurping uncle Miraz -- and in the hands of Narnia's secret army of dwarves, centaurs, talking animals and nature spirits. Soon Caspian has an army backing his claim to the throne, but in a moment of desperation, he is forced to blow the magic horn of the legendary Queen Susan -- and subsequently pulls the Pevensies back into Narnia.

But while only a year has passed on Earth, centuries have passed in Narnia, and the kids find that it's no longer the place they left -- they and Aslan are distant memories, and their castle lies in ruins. And as they are led by a very skeptical dwarf to help Caspian, Lucy keeps glimpsing Aslan along the way -- a sign that things are about to change drastically in Narnia, both for the human and magical inhabitants...

The Chronicles of Narnia were probably the first books to feature what is now standard in the fantasy genre -- an ordinary person gets dragged into another world. Just take a look at successful, unique authors like Diana Wynne Jones and Garth Nix to get an example of how Lewis' stories have influenced the entire genre.

If you don't like allegory (religious or otherwise), then steer clear of "Prince Caspian," especially the second half. While Lewis's beliefs are presented in a more complicated and subtle manner in his other fictional works, here the parallels to basic Christian beliefs are very obvious. Reportedly even Tolkien, one of Lewis's best pals, found the allegory annoying.

But if you can get past the slightly ham-handed treatment, it's a lovely little read. Lewis interweaves mythical elements -- dwarves, nymphs, talking animals, witches -- with the chatty, slightly precious style of traditional British storytelling. But this one is a bit darker and more action-packed than "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe," with some unexpected twists in the middle of it all. The scene with a strange witch and a werewolf is downright chilling, in fact.

But Lewis' plotting does sag near the end, during a drippy scene where Aslan wanders around fixing life for Narnian subjects. Fortunately after that, he gets back to a mystery that hangs over the whole book -- just where did all these humans come from, if they were such a rarity in the previous adventure?

Peter seems a bit more jaded than before and Edmund a bit more mature, but sadly the girls don't get enough to do this time around. But Caspian is a likable and believable prepubescent king-in-waiting, and surrounded by a bunch of unique Narnians -- a gentle yet fierce badger, a hostile dwarf, a fiery mouse, and the delightfully skeptical Trumpkin, who doesn't believe in lions.

Despite a few rough spots, "Prince Caspian" is a slightly darker, more intricate story, and its finale marks a turning point in the Chronicles of Narnia. Definitely give it a read before you see the movie.

It's funny, how you come at these books as an adult and take something completely different away from them than you would as a child. I read these books about 20 years ago when my uncle gave me a complete set for my birthday. As a child, I think I read them simply as a fantasy/adventure story. As an adult, I can see the subtle religious references sprinkled throughout, and while some may see this as a hindrance to the story, at least through the first 2 books (I go by the original published order, not the new chronological order), I can look beyond that to the story underneath.

However, in the case of Prince Caspian, there doesn't seem to be much in the way of story. It seems to me that the book can be broken up into two sections: the first being the Dwarf relating Caspian's understanding of his role of Narnia's future leader (the entire importance of this seems to be related to him over the course of one evening while star-gazing) and the second being Peter, Edmund, Susan and Lucy's trek through the jungle to get to Caspian. The ending seemed too contrived for my liking and far too rushed. It was all build up and no follow through as far as I'm concerned.

Looking at the story differently, it is a story about faith; about how faith can be hard to see sometimes, but it's always there and as long as you believe in that faith, it will lead you where you need it to. Overall a good moral to the story, if a little didactic in the telling.

Sophie's choice is a very engrossing novel, well written and poetic. The momentum towards the core of the novel, i.e. Sophie's choice, is masterfully built. But I felt very let down about the fact that Styron does not go into a more detailed analysis of Sophie's decision as he does with the man who compelled her to choose. Part of what made the novel unputdownable was that Styron entices the reader with promises of fascinating and shocking revelations throughout the novel. However, every time the revelations came, I felt disappointed with the banality of each of them. Styron is good at building anticipation but he doesn't deliver or satisfy.... kind of like Leslie and Mary Alice who tease him mercilessly causing frustration and anguish rather than fulfillment. I give this novel a B.

No spoilers.

I will not offer here a summary of this book, because clearly that has been done before by other reviewers; I will simply briefly state my opinions of Sophie's Choice.

If, by some chance, you are just now coming across this novel, I am jealous of you because you are ignorant of just how engrossed you are about to become in the story and lives of Syron's characters. This novel, at various times, either made me smile with delight, or had my mouth wide open with shock. Sophie's story is one that is almost too complicated to put down on paper, but, fortunately for us readers, Styron is able to do so masterfully.

Having known the goings on of the novel before actually reading it, I found it just a tad (and seriously, only a tad) bit slow in the beginning, but once Syron dove into the telling of Sophie's past, I simply could not put it down. Please do yourself a favor if you are a fan of high-quality writing with a fully-engrossing story to supplement it and read this RIGHT NOW.

I'm sorry but I must disagree with most Amazon users and say that I did not enjoy this book as much as I had anticipated based on its rave reviews.

I suppose my biggest objection to the novel is its extremely pornographic nature. Does the reader really need to know the details of Stingo's every sexual encounter? Does it further the plot in any way? No. If anything, these scenes detract from the plot and unnecessarily add more pages to an already lengthy book. And unfortunately we are forced to read about Sophie's tragic tale - a truly moving story about human reactions to pure evil, and the effects of the past on the present - through the narrative of a horny, immature 22-year-old.

Based on its title, I was disappointed to find that this book was mostly about Stingo, not Sophie. I do appreciate that Styron was using a different "path", so to say, to lead readers to the climax - Sophie's choice - but the story took too many detours. And once I had finally reached the pinnacle of the plot, I couldn't help but think, "That's it? That's how he ends it?" After all, I had read over 500 pages, enduring the dull or otherwise vulgar ramblings of Stingo, to slowly piece together Sophie's mysterious past, only to be left with one page describing the actual "choice." Its abruptness left me disappointed.

I may have enjoyed this book more had I not held such different expectations before starting it. Readers should be warned that this is a very adult book that does not directly tell Sophie's story. This novel also features explicit language (the f-word, the c-word, the k-word, etc.) that greatly surprised a prude such as myself. ;)

Sophie's story itself is harrowing and brilliant because it reminds us that no one - not even victims - are perfect, and that we must live with the consequences of our choices (sometimes even years later). I truly enjoyed the parts of Sophie's flashback, and I only wish that they were told from a different perspective, perhaps from someone less hormonal.

I agree with those reviewers who think that this novel is too long, and overloaded with sexual themes (review based on 1979 edition). Other than that, let's focus on matters not developed by other reviewers.

The Polish-Catholic nationalist Endeks (Endecks), as embodied by Sophie's father Professor Bieganski, are mis-portrayed as a Nazi, or quasi-Nazi, movement. (p. 223, 237, 239-243, 248, etc.). The ONR (O.N.R.) is misrepresented as a collaborationist outfit. (p. 471). Styron's obsession with Polish anti-Semitism goes as far as attributing to a character the statement that the Poles "practically invented anti-Semitism". (p. 472). Quite an inventive people, those Poles! In actuality, Jews were just as prejudiced against Poles as Poles were against Jews, if not more so. Real or imagined Polish hatred against Jews is condemned; never the reverse.

Styron viewpoint is that of a far left-winger critiquing the American South, and not strictly that of a Judeocentrist. His leading character, Sophie, is a Polish Catholic victim of Auschwitz. There are many allusions to Polish suffering at the hands of the Nazis, but these always come back to a Judeo-referential mindset. He finds parallels with Polish romanticism and aristocracy, and their Southern American counterparts, yet clearly realizes that Poland suffered much more from losing wars than did the South. (p. 247).

Styron's character compares the experiences of American blacks to that of Polish Jews. (e. g., p. 328). This is ridiculous. Blacks came by force (in chains), were slaves with no rights, did menial labor, were mostly poor, and were at the very bottom of society. Jews came to Poland voluntarily, served as traders, were largely exempt from the menial labor of the Polish masses, and--as middlemen situated between the nobility-few and the peasant-majority, enjoyed more rights and privileges than most Poles. Even with the discriminatory practices of the 1930's, enacted to reduce Jewish economic dominance, the average Jew remained wealthier than the average Pole. Jews were never barred from universities--to the contrary, Jews were much overrepresented in them. The later quotas restricting them were designed to reduce their representation to levels comparable to that in the general population, not to keep them out. Using modern parlance, these policies were forms of affirmative action designed to create more opportunities for Poles in Jewish-dominated endeavors. At no time in history did Poles and Jews drink from separate public fountains.

The informed reader quickly realizes that all of the major themes of SOPHIE'S CHOICE, predictably, rest upon selective historical memory. Polish anti-Semitism is emphasized, but not the Jewish particularism and disloyalty that provoked it. The hostile teachings of Christianity against Jews ("Christ killers") are mentioned (e. g., p. 255), but not the equally hostile Judaic teachings against Christ and Christianity (idolatrous worshippers of three gods, and of the Bastard Son of an Adulteress, etc.). Nor does the reader learn that some Jewish rabbis also believed that the Holocaust was God's punishment of Jewish sins.

For further elaboration on SOPHIE'S CHOICE, see the Peczkis reviews of Polish-Jewish Relations in North America (Polin Vol. 19) and William Styron's Sophie's Choice: Crime and Self-Punishment.

This book is on the Modern Library's Top 100 List. I thought the overall story was good, and for the most part I enjoyed reading this novel. I did not enjoy the vulgarity used throughout the book, I think the use of the F-word and the C-word, make any novel trashy. I also dislike how certain aspects of the book seem to be arbitrarily and capriciously thrown into the story that overall ends up losing a lot of the power the narrative portrays. It's cheesy at times. I also think Styron could have done without a lot of the lengthy description. As a novel, it could have been much better and much more powerful if more was left out. For example, other than the sex scene with Sophie and Stingo at the end, (which could have been much more romantically portrayed) all of Stingo's sexual fantasies and escapades should be left out. It's not relevent to his turbulent relationship with Sophie and Nathan, which is what made the story what it is.

Other than that, the whole tale of Sophie and her survival in the concentration camp is what makes this book worth reading. This is a very powerful portrayal of the tragedy that befell so many helpless victims. It also goes to show how evil statism can be. To think of so many people being slaughtered makes my stomach turn and tears well up in my eyes. To watch the people that you love and even strangers be sent to their deaths like cattle, it almost seems unreal that it ever happened.

It's understandable in the end why Sophie made so many bad choices, and it's also unquestionably tragic.

This novel by E.L. Doctorow traces the lives of (memorable) universal characters at the turn of the century. It never lost me when I was reading it and held onto me tight every step of the way. It did not allow me to put it down. Wonderful reading. Highly Recommended

I paid for a book that I never received. The seller ignored all of my attempts to contact them.

This book is exceptional. It is one of those books that rivets your mind; makes you realize how ordinary other books are by comparison.Sentence builds on sentence creating fantastic images making this book a joy to the senses.
Doctorow brilliantly recreates the Ragtime era using actual events and people from the time and interweaving with three fictional families;one WASP, Tateh and his daughter who are poor jewish migrants, and Coalhouse Walkers entanglement with the WASP family.
I normally condemn books written about the past as 'unauthentic' or 'lacking the realism' of the age discribed. 'Ragtime' and Doctorow show me that I was talking out of my hat! This really is superb. Anyone giving this less than 5 stars must be a green with envy writer wishing they could write like E L Doctorow!

I read this book within 24 hours as I had a paper due the next day on it. I give Doctorow credit for his poetic writing, it however seemed out of place in a dramatic novel, and did not make this a fun read. The sexual themes seemed placed if only to make things for interesting for a time, until the climax of the book near the final chapters. I was left disappointed, and if I had high expectations for the book in the first place, I would have called it's reading a waste of time all together. However, I was forced to read it- perhaps I have no taste for the genre.

Give this one a few chapters to hook you, as Doctorow's style here won't suit everyone's tastes. There is very little dialogue, and often he employs repetitive staccato sentences in brief summary descriptions, like: "He came in. He sat down. He counted his change. He put it in his pocket and left." Now, the way he does it actually fits each scene perfectly, but occasionally you'll notice it.

That small criticism aside, however, RAGTIME is teeming with historical figures and random tidbits while telling a rollicking story. Along the way you'll meet Houdini, Henry Ford, J. P. Morgan, George Washington Carver, Emma Goldman, Evelyn Nesbitt and many more. You'll get lost in another time and never want to come back.

And while you're reading, ask yourself two simple questions: First, who is telling this story? And second, how do they know all these things? You'll be glad you paid attention.

944-page two-part near-classic is undone by its weak ending, but still stands as a masterpiece of literature. Considered a "first novel", DQ plays on themes of meaning, faith, and madness with great humor.

Cervantes wrote the book in two parts separated by a five-year hiatus (1605 and 1610) during which another author wrote a poorly-received second part, which Cervantes attacks repeatedly in his own followup.

As long as it is, the translation while "unabridged" does not translate all of the original Spanish. Part of the Oxford World's Classics" series, this translation is the famous Jarvis translation from 1742, which was long considered the classic translation. While modern language scholarship has revealed its inexactness, the Oxford version uses it because it best captures the feel if not the word-for-word meaning of the translation, and end notes identify where Jarvis has veered from the original to maintain rhymes, jokes, and puns.

I love the story but have never been able to finish the book. I listened to this on a road trip to California and found it very enjoyable. They did cut a major section, but I guess that is what you contend with in an abridged version.

The translation is perfect except, as the translator has noted, on the poems found through out the book. The book itself is just plain beautiful, the author, Cervantes, is a master of prose and creativity, not to mention he has a great sense of humor. In my opinion, he is not too far off from Shakespeare. A+

'Don Quixote' is largely considered to be a satire on the popular chivalric ballads of Cervantes' day, but don't be fooled. This novel is no satire on chivalry, itself. Indeed, through the trials of Quixote and Sancho Panza, Cervantes is perhaps the greatest promoter of chivalric ideas that the West has ever known. No other protagonist so thoroughly embodies the ideals of heroism, romantic love, friendship, honor, discretion, trust, virtue, and adventure than does Don Quixote. It just so happens that he is insane, but the author is able to look beyond that. So too should the reader.

The knight's sallies are absolutely delightful and, it must be credited, alone prove Cervantes' genius in writing. The dialogue between Quixote and Sancho is excellent comedy, creating a duo that has gone unsurpassed in originality and endearment for five centuries. "Is it possible that Your Worship can be so thick skulled and brainless as to not perceive the truth of what I allege?" Classic.

But these adventures, hilarious as they may be, give us frame for a storehouse chivalric truisms, the like of which can be found in no other work of fiction. A sampling would include: "An author had better be applauded by the few that are wise than laughed at by the many that are foolish;" "Anyone who has been a good squire will never be a bad governor;" "There is a wide difference between flying and retreating; valor which is not founded on the base of discretion is termed temerity or rashness;" and "Whenever virtue shines in an emanant degree, she always meets with persecution."

The reader cannot help but to love such regal assuredness, such profound idealism. Ironically, Quixote's insanity never really contradicts his optimism and in fact vindicates it. It is commentary on the human condition that only the insane person can actually accomplish something virtuous. And after all the delusions are expired and all the fallacies uncovered, Don Quixote actually has accomplished everything he set out to achieve if only because he was noble enough to strive for it.

A note must be made on the translations. While much of the verbiage is straightforward, there are several repeated phrases that are different between the major translations, Quixote's moniker being one of the most important. In every translation I have seen, the name has been different--"The Knight of the Rueful Countenance," "The Knight of the Mournful Countenance," and "The Knight of the Sorrowful Face" are all used for the same phrase. I enjoyed the "Rueful Countenance" and found it to be well-suited for the style of the novel though I have not read other translations.

In the end, though, you cannot go wrong. 'Don Quixote' is a pure joy to read and we are fortunate to have the ability to do so.

Don Quixote well deserves its place in the pantheon of world classics. For me, it's the ultimate desert island book. It is simply an indescribable jewel, full of fun, hilarity, adventure, beauty, wisdom, social commentary, tragedy, and entertainment. And I believe that J.M. Cohen's translation is the best there is. He obviously had a love for the material and left us a beautifully rendered work. The encomium in his Times obituary was on the mark when it said that he was "the translator of foreign prose classics for our times."

The Cd begins with the powerful witches scene-great music-definitely causing my students to sit-up and listen.

The Dover Thrift Edition is a good choice for a reading text because it presents the entire, unabridged play, and has enough notes to be helpful to inexperienced readers without overwhelming or distracting them. The omition of a scholarly apparatus makes the Dover Edition more flexible and keeps it from becoming outdated.

This product was great. It helped my students and I read and comprehend Macbeth so much better than us trying to read it and comprehend it. The actors voices are great! I think they do a great job being the characters on tape!

William Shakespeare (1564-1616) was a dramatist whose genius is universally acknowledged, with a reputation as an actor, playwright and poet. He lived in an age of vast and significant changes characterised by the rise of the middle class and of a centralised government and the disappearance of medieval religious beliefs. England was transforming into a modern state. This was a time when self-realisation, self-respect and boldness of thought and action was idealised. Shakespeare's drama merely reflected the dramatic times of the age.

Shakespeare's genius can be reflected by the variety of his productions, where out of the 36 plays he has left, no two are alike and he managed to articulate the diverse subjects with exceptional expertise, handling both tragedies and comedies with ease.

Macbeth is a tragedy, intended to teach us a lesson about the human condition. The play is a tragedy about a wealthy Scottish noble called Macbeth who kills his king to gain the throne. During Shakespeare's time, this was a terrible thing to do, and from then on, Macbeth was doomed to die a tragic death.

The play starts with three witches confronting the great Scottish general Macbeth on his victorious return from a war between Scotland and Norway. The witches predict that he will one day become king. They also predict that another General called Banquo will be the father of kings, although he will not ascend the throne himself. The Scottish king, Duncan, decides that he will confer the title of the traitorous Cawdor on the heroic Macbeth. Macbeth, with the urging of his evil and ambitious wife murder King Duncan and ascends to the throne of Scotland.

Macbeth and his evil wife begin to do strange things, partly because of what they have done and also because they never get a whole night's sleep. Macbeth thinks he has to kill two of his former friends because he believes that they threaten his new throne. His efforts fail and he is eventually killed.

Virtually all editions of Macbeth will have at least some annotations. Rummaging through five different editions, I preferred the Yale University Press version, edited by Burton Raffel, as having the most comprehensive and comprehensible notes, as well as an excellent introduction to Shakespeare's play. Raffel not only explains the meanings of obscure words, but also gives brief notes pertaining to relevant history, geography, stage directions, etc, that are rarely addressed as fully by other editors. In addition, Raffel frequently gives the proper way to stress the syllables in a line when reading it aloud, which can be extremely helpful. (However, in most places these stresses need to be very subtle, so that you don't sound like "taDUM taDUM taDUM".) And Yale's page layout is among the clearest that I've seen.

(To find this edition: at Avanced Search, enter ISBN 0300106548; or, enter Macbeth as title, and either Raffel as author or Yale as publisher.)

As a bonus, this edition includes at the back a long essay on the play by Harold Bloom. This is not an uninteresting commentary, but Bloom desperately needs a good editor. His essay is not only at least three times longer than it should be, but is startlingly repetitious. Yale would have been wise to have asked Bloom for a rewrite.