Bloom Books

Ordered as new and that is exactly what I received. The text will be used by my son for his ancient literature class. Excellent source.

This Epic was referred by my professor. Although some parts of the epic confused me I really enjoyed it. Very interesting.

This was an excellent play, entertaining and easy to read. You understand how Oedipus came to power in the manner in which he did, and what became of his kin. I would recommend it to anyone who has been a bit intimidated by the "old classics." I can hardly wait to see a play about Oedipus Rex!

Although it wasn't exactly what I needed(my fault) it was in excellent condition and shipped promtly

This was a great book. I never liked reading plays before I read Oedipus Rex. It's a really interesting plot with a really cool (disgusting) ending. Read this book. You won't regret it.

Scribner has created a beautiful book in this edition. The illustrations are on heavy glossy paper and are magnificent. There are very nice, free readings of this work online, and so I purchased the book for my young children to enjoy - to read while listening to the narrator. My only complaint is the book is abridged. This is not evident from the description. I think most editions of this work are abridged. When the book ended, I was left wondering what became of Friday, as he is not mentioned again after the final battle. The author did not seem like one who would leave out that detail, and so I discovered the unabridged story is longer. Still, the quality of the book and the beauty of the illustrations are so very nice that I cannot knock a star off my review.

"I came on shore here on the 30th of September, 1639." These words, these few words signified the beginning of a new life for Robinson Crusoe. In the timely classic Robinson Crusoe by Daniel Defoe, a young boy becomes a man, after living alone on an island for 35 years. Set in the 1600's, our protagonist, Robinson Crusoe, is stranded on an isolated island after being shipwreck by a terrible storm. He has to learn anything and everything in order to survive on the island. At first, Robinson Crusoe struggles with the need of food, shelter, and protection. But most of all, Robinson Crusoe battles against the desperate need of company. Slowly, Crusoe starts to fall into a pattern: he built a sturdy fortress, raised up a good crop, managed to satisfy all his need with his own to hands, and took the Bible to his heart. Defoe wonderfully creates a realistic mental scene of all Robinson Crusoe dealt with while, the illustrator, N.C. Wyeth, visually portrays the moments of Crusoe's life vividly. The style of Robinson Crusoe switches between first person narrative and dairy format. The book is fast-paced, skimming years, while writes in detail on only the most important parts of his island survival. Defoe neatly described all aspects of Robinson Crusoe's life from religion to family. Finally, Defoe puts in, in my opinion, a theme of never giving up, no matter what the circumstances, for if you stack up the good against the battle, you will find the good shall always outweigh the bad.

Note: Your "helpful" votes are appreciated. Thanks.

There are a lot of psychological and social theories about "Robinson Crusoe," but I just take it as a grand adventure. I loved all the details of how he survived after being shipwrecked on that island. Just remember that it was written in the seventeenth century so you have to get used to writing.

I have a warm place in my heart for Robinson Crusoe. Some fifty years ago in the second grade, my teacher read it to our class. Decades later, I told my wife about it, but she said that it was impossible. Robinson Crusoe is too difficult for a teacher to read to second graders.

Well, several years went by, and I was proved right. In a used bookstore, I bought a copy of "The Story of Robinson Crusoe in words of One Syllable," with "Colored Illustrations." The book was published in about 1900, and when my teacher read it to her class, the book was over fifty years old.

Since then I have collected paperback editions of "Robinson Crusoe" for their neat covers, and this one is really nice.

If you like shipwrecked-on-an-island stories, read Richard Laymon's "Island." It's a page-turner of a modern murder mystery.
Island

Everyone knows the story...so the issue is who can read the
literature in a compelling way. Clearly, Martin Shaw has the touch. My only criticism is that this audio Cassette should be made into an audio CD for most modern listeners.

The century in which Robinson Crusoe had his adventures was a time of exploration and colonialism. Daniel Defoe's story is famous for many reasons. For one thing, it is one of the first books to be written in modern English. Secondly, the adventuristic appeal has won the hearts and interests of generations of readers. And thirdly, it is an affirmation of the culture and society of the times (in comparison with Gulliver's Travels, a book that was more a satire of the times).

The book is set up in three parts, those being Crusoe's exploration of the world, being cast away on the island, and the providential return to society. The three parts are used to establish the world he exists in, to defend the world he exists in, and then to return to it after he's been able to properly exist outside of it.

Many readers may find a lot of comfort in his story. His ingenuity, perseverence, and industry combine somewhat melodramatically with his humbleness and self-discovery of God, which he defends mightily throughout. The story on a whole is hopeful and endearing: work hard, respect God, and even the most unlucky of man will abide.

Unfortunately, his tale hasn't aged well. The use of cannibal savages, slaves, and the like throughout the novel might offend some people. The constant care for divinity is at first really refreshing, but becomes tedious as the book starts to fall into a pattern of comfort-discomfort-speculation-God-comfort which may have been very enriching on the time, but today gets tedious. I don't want to intone that piety and response to the Bible is bad, I'm just saying it's out of place in modern vernacular.

Defoe himself shows a comprehensive understanding of the language, the characters, and the times. It is, really, a remarkable piece of writing structurally. However, its themes have aged, making it less than Universal, and for that matter somewhat misunderstood with modern-day audiences.

I'd say get this, the Dover Thrift edition. It's cheap, unabridged, and includes a quick introduction that makes the reading experience vastly more enriching. Otherwise it may be time to set this story to rest.

--PolarisDiB

Bloom is at his best when he dissects many of Shakespeare's most wonderful dialogues and speeches. His analysis of Iago's soliloquys or of the pastoral section of The Winter's Tale are unforgettable. He is also quite convincing in demolishing various modern critical attempts to put Shakespeare in one box or another -- feminist, Freudian, anti-colonialist, or whatever suits the day's fancy.

He also makes no effort to hide his "bardolatry," i.e. his worship of Shakespeare. At age 13, I was given a Complete Works and started to read it. I can be assured that if I made something of Macbeth, I made nothing of Love's Labour's Lost. Yet the poetry rang true for me and always has rung true. Bloom brings back that sense of Shakespeare as unequalled genius of poem and character.

However, I grew tired of the constant litany of "Hamlet, Lear, Rosalind, Cleopatra, Iago," and others -- the names that Bloom constantly invokes in every chapter. These are Shakespeare's greatest creations; we know that. Bloom should not belabor the point. It only detracts from the power of a major work of criticism.

THIS book is like having an excellent professor guiding you through the labyrinth that Shakespeare can be...and Harold Bloom blows away the doors of perception!

Bloom is the great literary critic of our day, the master reader of our greatest literature. Shakespeare has always been for him the central figure of our literary tradition, the one who by far created the most. In his play by play analysis of Shakespeare Bloom argues that Shakespeare invented our present day conception of the human. He is the one who allowed our own inner minds to speak on the page. He is the one who created characters of flexibility and breadth beyond those we had known before. Bloom writes with inspiration as he exalts Rosalind, Falstaff, Hamlet, his major favorites and hosts of others. Bloom does what a great critic is supposed to do he gives us a far richer and greater sense of the work than we had before. He makes us eager to know it more.

I teach Shakespeare despite not having studied literature or English in college. I find several books very useful to me, this one among them. If you're reading Shakespeare for pleasure, you've almost got to use this as a companion to the plays. Bloom is a critic and commentator you should not miss, perhaps destined to be remembered in the same class as Samuel Johnson. His take on the plays is generally idiosyncratic and always thought-provoking and insightful.

On the other hand, this should not be your only companion to Shakespeare. If you're only going to have one--and why would you?--I think you'd have to choose Marjorie Garber's "Shakespeare After All." I always consult that one before Bloom, because she offers a more fundamental analysis, while Bloom jumps right into his opinions. It is almost true to say that Bloom's book is as much about Bloom as it is about Shakespeare, and if that sounds critical, then for the record Bloom is one who can pull that off.

If you are an undergraduate and especially if you are a high school student, you won't go wrong with Garber, though Bloom alone might lead you astray. If you can read both, great; if not, Garber. I also commend Cliffs Notes to any student who struggles with line-by-line comprehension. (I know that other teachers don't do that, and I think they're really just being snobs. Really, Shakespeare is great fun if you understand, and if not, then you've got to do something, haven't you?)

Finally, if you want a deeper discussion of various issues (history, religion, interpretation, staging etc...), the Cambridge Companions are excellent.

Incidently, the subtitle is misleading. Bloom's "invention" thesis is hardly the subject matter of the book. He spends maybe 3 pages on it, not doing the historical analysis such a thesis would require, but merely heaping hyperbole upon hyperbole in praise of Shakespeare. We don't read Shakespeare, Shakespeare reads us... and so on. It's simply an excuse, as if he needed one, to publish his thoughts on all of Shakespeare's plays.

I have to admit up front that I like reading Harold Bloom. I don't always agree with him and I often find his pronouncements on this, that and the other quite arrogant and short-sighted. On the other hand, his opinions often challenge me to consider my own and I respect his decades of grappling with the Bard and the history of Shakespearean criticism. As a fellow sufferer of Bardolatry, I feel I can sympathize with the man.

And what of this book? Well, it is quite the tome. Containing analysis of each of Shakespeare's plays, it's a test of endurance. Anyone who isn't familiar with the vast majority of Shakespeare's plays would be advised, perhaps, to read the introductory essays and dip into those chapters on the plays he knows.

As for myself, having read and seen most of the plays in the canon, I read the book through. In every chapter I found something valuable and I wouldn't have missed reading it for the world. When he feels a character is interesting or important--Iago, Cleopatra, Rosalind, Lear to name a few--he can wax practically poetic in his insight. The things that don't interest him he dismisses out of hand with a cutting remark or ignores entirely.

Still, to be frank, reading too much of this at once can be tiresome. In large doses it is like listening to the grumblings of an old man who feels his time is past and he doesn't get the respect he deserves anymore. He hasn't seen a performance of Shakespeare he's liked in thirty or more years. He rejects all modern forms of criticism and interpretation. His obsession with Hamlet and, in particular, Falstaff, finds its way into the discussion of practically every play. I love Hamlet almost as much as Bloom but even I got tired of him as he appeared time and again. As for Falstaff: there can be no doubt he is a great character; however I think it takes a man of Bloom's age to rate him so far above many of the other Shakespearean characters.

And as for Bloom's assertion that Shakespeare invented the human as we know it? Well, that may be pushing it a bit far for my taste but I take his point. The introspective nature and universality of Shakespeare's greatest characters was revolutionary. Certainly many important thinkers after him have found in Shakespeare the inspiration for ideas that have impacted our world. Our world--and most definitely our theater--would be different had Shakespeare never written. Still, would the nature of human beings be so very different? I remain unconvinced.

Ah, but Bloom makes it easy to argue with him. He invites it. And I enjoy the debate. If one can ignore the provocative prose and rake for the gems, these are pages worth mining. I, for one, am glad I did.

This is a beautifully written book with some great strengths, but it is almost as frustrating as it is enjoyable. Menocal delineates the big picture well, tracing the evolution of medieval Iberia from Abbasid province to Ummayad caliphate, through political breakdown to a bevy of competing Muslim and Christian taifas(city-states), which then slowly came under the sway of Castile. Ummayad Al-Andalus treated the dhimmi -- "Peoples of the Book" well: the Jewish community, in particular, prospered and played an active role in the economy, state, and Arabic-speaking culture of the peninsula. This intersection of peoples within a "culture of tolerance" was richly fruitful: for example, in Toledo Jews translated Arabic into early Castilian, which Christians then translated into Latin, thus making ancient Greek texts that had been preserved in Arabic available to Christian Europe. Menocal is at her best tracing the manifold influence of Iberian culture on both its component peoples and on northern Europe. Jews such as Samuel the Nagid revitalized Hebrew under the influence of Arabic poetry. Petrus Alfonsi, a Jewish convert to Christianity, brought knowledge of Islam and Judaism, some scientific knowledge, and new literary forms to England. Peter the Venerable of Cluny visited Toledo in search of translators of the Quran. Sparks flew in every direction. Menocal succeeds in re-contextualizing familiar works. Maimonides and Averroes appear as products of Al-Andalus, born into its culture of tolerance, accepting that faith and reason were compatible - but out of tune with the growing power of the repressive Almohad Muslim regime of their day. The elusive line between truth and fiction in Don Quixote echos a post-1492 Spain filled with Moriscos and Marranos who might be Christians or highly practiced pretenders.
Despite the rich, evocative portrayal of Al-Andalus and its influence, Ornament of the World has some frustrating gaps. The boundaries of the "culture of tolerance" are never clearly defined: however willing Muslims and Jews were to borrow one another's poetic forms, did they also live in the same quarters of the city, intermarry, do business together? Admittedly, this may be substituting my own interests for those of the author. But the author also does not explain convincingly why a culture of tolerance arose on the Iberian peninsula in this period, or why it eventually fell. The fall of the culture of tolerance is discussed in the epilogue, but this reader, at least, came away unsatisfied.

My oh my, reading some of the extremely negative reviews of this book and seeing the obvious bias of some of the reviewers makes me wish that I could come out swinging in Menocal's defense.

Unfortunately, I cannot. While Menocal clearly has deep affinity and love for the subject matter she fails to support her thesis as she only could have done by reaching farther than culture and poetry for reference. She makes some interesting suggestions through anecdotal evidence, but I found it extremely frustrating that she made no effort to more fully flesh out a claim that would have been very interesting, if true. Furthermore, I do not find that the book was contextualized as simply being a piece of the puzzle of Medieval Spain. I find that it made grander claims for itself. This could well be the fault of the publisher, who recognized a timely topic when he/she saw one (the book was published in 2002). But still, it hurt the overall credibility of the work not to strongly delimit in the beginning both what it is and what it is not.

I have heard much said about Menocal's writing style, both positive and negative. I will grant her a smooth hand with prose. Sadly, she does not exhibit anywhere near the same skill with structure. I found the text did not cohere well and tended to be jumpy and difficult to follow.

She clearly loves her poetry from the time, and I am looking forward to reading some of the writers that I discovered through the book. I found the "Other Readings" chapter particularly valuable. She gets an extra star for all the wonderful poetry that I'm anxious to read.

This book I could recommend to anyone who wants to learn more about the early history of modern Europe. Usely it is said that the classical age ended with the Romans, and then after a thousand turbiulent years suddenly appeared renewed culture in Europe with the renaissance. Like there was a big gap in civilization. But there wasn't. There was the great arabic empire that stretched from Marocco to Pakistan, with it's poetry and philosofy and a culture where religion and science went hand in hand. Furthermore there is this remarkable story about a prince who flees from his mothercountry to build his new kingdom, which soon becomes the heart of culture in Europe, where jews, muslims and christians lived and worked side by side. A culture as big that it easely fills the gap the Romans left. A remarkable story that eventually will trigger the renaissance. The forgotten story of Al-Andalus.
Allthough objective this story is written from the point of view of Al-Andalus itselve, which gives a perfect contrapoint to the somewhat common historyclass seen from the christian (castillian) point of view. This put the "Moors" as they denegratedly are called in a totally new perspective.

The culture of tolerance was created by MUSLIMS who were rulling Spain, the writer failed to point out that it was the muslims who granted and who created this tolerance of others.

I am stunned at some reviews here who talked about the tolerance of Muslims at that time with the terms of the 21th century ! this is absurd, you cant look at that era in the eyes of this 21th century.

The tolerance muslims gave to christians and jews was unmatched anywhere else in the world and the jewish massacre in 1066 has political and religious grounds, it did not happen out of nothing or because the victims just happend to be jews, in fact, at the very same time in 1066, Granada has JEWISH wazir or in modern terms prime minister !

It is stil great book to read.

I enjoyed this book. From my limited understanding of the time period and my inability to read history (facts after facts never interest me... the human element, devoid of many historical accounts, does...).

I have read the positive reviews and the negatives. I can understand either. I will say this book is a great introduction. It is romantic, an account of a world seen with Rosy-Tinted Scholarly eyes. Perhaps it is not going to be the greatest book for the nitpicking historians - and hey, I can see their point - but it is a good place to start, to know the names, the dates, and some of the scenery.

I wish more history books were like this. What is 'history' - a story... the word is there within the greater word most scholars will defend, arguing our need to be objective and search for the facts ('just the facts, 'mam'). But isn't that life, "stories" interweaving, facts important sidenotes to the human element. I respect this work because it has introduced me to a world I have heard about before. It will be my choice to move on further and read other works.

Those who have written their one-star reviews have their point. There is a lot missing here. I don't doubt it. But if a work of history introduces and inspires curiosity, is that a bad thing? Ideals are ideals and ideally, this isn't meant for the historian but for the layman. I am a layman, I enjoyed it. If you're looking for an introduction to a fascinating time in Spanish/Western history, this is a fine place to start. I don't know enough to squabble over details or put the author down for 'misreading' history. I'll simply say, Menocal has written a story about a time and place. Her writing is infused with melancholy and wonder, looking back to the golden aspects of a time believed to be harmonious.

If history was written from the perspective of the people, not so much the events and politics, I would read more history. But then again, I'm not a historian and this book suits me fine. I'll read further but I am thankful I had this book to open my eyes to an interesting time in human civilization.

The final word: historians, you know enough, so don't read this because you'll probably just write more negative reviews and negativity is really tiring at times. (If you don't have something nice to say, don't say it all all... I've written the odd negative review, so I'm guilty...) Layman and Laywoman, if you have a passion for a literary interpretation of history, enjoy this book. It is like wine for me. I savoured it, I took it in, I will remember and go on to the next. But I value the beginnings of what I have learned. And that's the facts, 'mam.

This fifth book in the Full Series is the best so far. The first book Full House was a nice romance book with a limited mystery, but it introduced us to Max. The next three books: Full Tilt, Full Speed and Full Blast took Max and now Jamie into adventures and a developing romance. When it seem to be evening out, enter this book. I love that the characters move from book to book so that there is an atmosphere of familiarity without stagnating. For me it brings this charming southern town to a more dimentional level. This book also brings in the humor I associate with Evanovich in Her Plum series. Though not as developed I still found some laugh out loud moments and look forward to Full Scoop, the next in the series.

This was the first book I have read by the two authors. It was a hoot. The characters were full of fun. Annie reminded me of ...me! She is a klutz that means well, but things always seem to go wrong. Wes,her love interest,is a hunk without being over whelming.
The two boarders were touching, but I loved the "doc". Every time I think about him I get the giggles. Evanovich is always good for a laugh, and I wouldn't hesitate to buy another book co-authored with Hughes.

It was a fun book, just like the others. When I started reading it i could not put it down

Full Bloom, another in a the "Full" series by Janet Evanovich and Charlotte Hughes carries on with the humor and romance of the rest of the series.

I fully enjoyed the mystery, the romance and humor of this book--often laughing out loud. I'm really glad my mother introduced me to this series of books.

My only issue with this book is that the main characters from the last three books in the series, Max and Jamie, as well as their lovable computer, Muffin are relegated to minor characters. Who are Annie and Nick? I mean I like them well enough, and the story line, but it is odd that a series takes a turn like this and focuses on totally new characters. When I started this series, I thought each book did just that, focused on new characters and stories. Then, after three books with Max and Jamie, I thought the series had morphed into their series.

That said, the book and the entourage of new characters was enjoyable. It is a comedy, romantic suspense and does not disappoint.

You can tell by the 1 star reviews, that children these days don't have half the imagination it takes to read a book that is not about wizards or witches. This is an excellent book that I read several times as a child, and was recently racking my brain to remember the name so I could find it to read it again. It also goes to show the attitude of today's youth that they can't appreciate the struggles of someone that has to fight to keep their family together and survive.

Yeah I guess this book was O.K... but I have read better. It was too repetitive, and dated. I would rather read Twilight or Harry Potter any day.

I finished reading this book last night. Although it wasn't the best book I've ever read, it held my attention. I think the book's main theme was about surviving and handling life's problems with perseverance and dignity.

It also enlightended me about wildcrafting (making money with medicinal herbs) and a few new vocabulary words such as trogolyte ( a cave-dweller). I thought the ending was flat and too easy though. This would be a good book for older children and young teens.

This was a good book. You have to see beyond the storyline. This is about a girl promising her dying father to take on the responsibility of two adults on her 14 year old shoulders. She takes care of not only hiding her father's death from others (in order to keep the kids together), but she provides for her family, food, shelter, and still goes to school herself. With her older sister hardly helping her because she is a ditzy girl in love with a school boy. This book shows us that if you really are a go-getter, you can provide for your family without handouts from the outside world. Through gathering herbs, and wildflowers, and tree barks to make remedies; she sold to make money for food she provided for her siblings. Try that now a days, and kids can't even clean their own bedrooms! People have it too easy now a days, with free this and that, there's no will to provide for yourself. Read this and you will learn how families can stick together and provide for their own. This is a great lesson to today's society of the ones who look for free handouts like we owe them the world.

I first read it when I was young and loved it and the movie. Now as a teacher with young teenagers I thought it would be a good book to read in our Language Arts class. The girls thought the book was a good book on the theme of survival. The connected with Mary Call being fourteen and trying to keep her family together. They thought she was courageous and showed great determination. Each of my students felt the eay Mary Call felt in the events that uncurled. It is a great book about a young girl trying to survive in a world that presents itself with many obstacles.

i love this book, its as simple as that.

i'v never understood peoples negative feelings towards mr. bloom, this is the guy who got me into reading beyond my usual diet of histories and non fiction.

i read this book over and over again...he is funny, lucid and very enjoyable to listen to.

Genius: A Mosaic of One Hundred Exemplary Creative Minds (2002) - Harold Bloom

I will admit right now that I found this book to be rather difficult. There is no doubt that Mr. Bloom has a tremendous amount of learning, but what happens oftentimes, unfortunately, is that Mr. Bloom writes with the assumption that we have had the same amount of learning. This is especially true when it comes to speaking of particular beliefs and movements (such as Gnosticism, Post-Romanticism, etc.) However, I still enjoyed this book very much. The reviewer that stated that this book is not actually about the true genius of each individual is absolutely correct: Mr. Bloom oftentimes just throws out a general statement to describe the genius without ever truly elucidating the statement. For example, I believe one Genius was the "genius of nightmare", yet if I remember correctly, it was never explained exactly how he was the genius of nightmare, or what that really even means.

What this book is really about is Mr. Bloom's tremendous passion for literature because it really shows in his writing. And what's great is the huge amount of new material that lovers of literature (such as myself) can now search through to find more great works that they will love in te future. There are so many writers in here that I had never even heard of before that it is a little ridiculous. For example, I found the poetry of Gerard de Nerval to be amazing, yet this man did not even exist to me before Mr. Bloom pointed him out.

It is true that Mr. Bloom is arrogant, and that he goes on tangents, and that he often contradicts himself, and that he often makes no sense, and yes, this can get a little annoying, but really, all that does not matter when we truly look at the tiny drawbacks and compare them to Mr. Bloom's tremendous positives. Therefore, overall, I would highly recommend this piece of work. The love and passion put into it is clearly felt.

Before getting on good professor's case, let me say something upfront - as
a reference book, it is worth having. Bloom's taste is generally good; and
because of his wide erudition, he can suggest authors that dilettantes (speaking strictly for myself) would not have heard otherwise. Now, Blooms explanations as to why this or other book is great are mostly vacuous. He has a couple of fixed concepts - gnosticism, agon, etc (not too much of etc) which he almost arbitrarily pattern-matches to a given author. One could probably write an artificial intelligence program which
would churn out Bloom-like reviews - and possibly pass Turing test (assuming the human on the other end is Professor Bloom).

In addition, Bloom's pretentiousness is not even funny. Most people at least pick up the tone when they write about things (or people) they do not like. Bloom does not even do that - his barbs have very dull teeth. As for Kabbalah - let's not even get started...

To summarize - the reader can mostly trust Bloom's instincts in picking good writers, but his justifications can be largely ignored - or the time is better spent to read the books themselves.

This is a good book (with some caveats), and Prof. Bloom is a fair to good literary critic--but, in my opinion, not a great one. I'll explain.

The title, "Genius, A Mosaic of One Hundred Exemplary Creative Minds" is a book on writers to the exclusion of those in other arts or sciences. Bloom acknowledges that but still retains the misleadingly general title. It would more properly be entitled "One Hundred of Some of History's Best Writers"--more to the point. And lets get out from under the genius part of it.

An additional come-on is the jacket art, a detail of the Sistine Chapel ceiling. I suppose God reaching to touch Adam's finger bespeaks of the genius aspect of this, (not just giving life as the original intention was). Doubtless that influences impulse shoppers who might believe this book would include the visual arts. Also the jacket blurbs on Bloom are a little overwrought, "flashes of lightning", "A colossus among critics...", etc.

Bloom organizes his book by headings from the Jewish Kabbala using generally unknown words. I find this pretentious, and distracting. Wanting to employ a seldom used typology to organize his material is understandable, but his choice here seems to me wrong-headed. Say an East Indian music expert did an anthology of composers under headings of the chakras--crown chakra, base chakra, etc., and in their Sanscrit names. What would that really have to do with music, and why force it down our throats? So, by any ordinary stretch, what does the Kabbala have to do with bright authors, and why force that down our throats?

He writes that his choices are "grandly arbitrary". Arbitrary yes, but with "grandly" he makes a virtue out of necessity. Where is Aeschylus? Where is Horace? Where is Solzhenitsyn? Where is Conrad? I would have hoped for leaving space for more of the manly writers.

Alas, the oracular Freud, whom I'd thought we'd benificently heard the last of, gets big space here. While he put together interesting typologies and the marginally effective psychotherapy, he is now passe. Freud had smart people fooled and bullied for way too long. (Bloom puts in Freud and leaves out Solzhenitsyn--crazy!)

But Bloom has the good taste to most favor, Sir. Henry Neville--attributed all these centuries, notwithstanding some good argument to the contrary, to the actor/manager, Shakespeare. And this may never change; how can you deny a name like "Shakespeare"? "Neville" simply wouldn't start to compete in the name department.

Bloom writes glowingly about the Yahwist, an author of the Pentateuch known as "J", and touches on the anthropomorphic god of that era. In a neat reversal, he notes that man has more rightly been called theomorphic--(very telling for Sumeria at that time).

But in his Sumerian translations, Orientalist and biblilcal scholar Zecharia Sitchin (a Jew) has shown that the gods of that period, who before had created (gene spliced) Homo Sapien in their image and influenced human events for some time thereafter, were small "g" gods who had traveled here from elsewhere in the cosmos. So J's god, Yahweh, while powerful, then, turns out to be an advanced humanoid and not the actual big "G" God (who was there all along), or Allah, or Brahma, or Self that Jesus, Muhammed, and the Upanishads presented.

In the section on Saint Paul, the author notes the lack of authenticatible information on the historic Jesus and John the Baptiser, something most Christians do not want to hear. This, of course, casts a penumbra of doubt over the whole Christian religious enterprise.

By the same token, as Sitchin's scholarship, which is absent in this volume, becomes more mainstream, just the fact of it would call for a new revised version of the Pentateuch. Unfortunately, this realization will be uncomfortable for some, such as the True Torah Jews who are so right and righteous in several utterly admirable ways.

For God, however immanent, that does not and did not manifest a physical presence,
the question remains for Christians as to His presence in the Trinity. My hunch and logic would have me side with the pre-Nicean Arians who said not.

Bloom then presents Muhammed; and, comparatively speaking, Islam looks very good indeed.

Finally, the practice of buggery, brought up in the D. H. Lawrence section, whether it be hetero or homo, is unnatural, unaesthetic and immoral--and it can be fatal. But I don't see Bloom stating a principled view here--just noting it and moving right along. (He doesn't connect the dots with the story on Sodom by his so admired Biblical writer, the Yahwist.) He thereby passes a chance to be a critic of some moral relevance. More than once in the book Bloom tiresomely notes his age, (seventy-one at the time of writing); still a youngster, but sadly, perhaps, too late to find a moral compass.

And, if not too late, I would urge the Professor, allowing that he might see these critiques some day, to consider inviting the writings of the Stoics into his forebrain--especially Seneca, and even more especially Epictitus: sublime and powerful normative moral philosophy that rivals the best one might find in any other ethical thought systems, secular or religious.

For me, that would be critical writing of a high order.

your view on this book will track with your appetite for erudition, academia and intellectual challenge. the criticisms that this book is "ivory tower" & arrogant are right!
Having said that, I enjoy the challenge, entertainment and new ideas Bloom always brings to the table. Some of his more esoteric trappings -- such as the Kabbalah-based framework for the book -- I simply ignore. But I think his love of the classics and belief in deep reading as a source of humanity are thought-provoking and much needed.
if you love literature and are willing to work a little, this is great book to read slowly and savor.

What happened to my man McCarthy? He had the fabulous Continuum series and then tried to get all metaphysical on us. In the process, he seems to have taken a stupid pill for we are back to the old Star Trek days of smart, living non-coporal bodies. You remember, the big cloud that was alive or the germs that were smart? In this case it's origin, though never actually confirmed, seems to be a product of Earth. Yep, it's evil nanotech gone wild. A self-replicating nanobot escapes and turns the Earth into goo. A few lucky ones escape to Mars or the asterois or Jupiter.

OUr hero, a reporter in the future, is from one of Jumpiter's moons. He is selected for a mission to study the Bloom phenomena on Earth and send his trademark stories back to a world waiting with bated breath. At the same time there has risen a group that attaches spiritual qualities to the bloom (the process of converting mass) and have conducted terrorist attacks using blooms as weapons. I won't bore you but eventually you learn that the evil politicians actually want to hurt the poor thing that destroyed the Earth, Moon and Mars. Thankfully, at the last minute, our hero's gal in the hay fesses up - Yep, she's a believer and in fact is infected with the bloom and ....EEEEEEEE. She goes ballistic before their stunned faces but she is thankfully pushed into the air lock. This got our reporter thinking that maybe, just maybe, they were right and the Bloom was alive.

Suddenly, like Jehova speaking to Moses (or more apt, "God" speaking to Star Trek crew in that hokey movie) a face of the bloom emerges and "speaks" to them. Think seances, nebulous 20 questions and "spiritual" qualities and you're on the right path. Mankind discovers the errors of their ways and in the end, slowly we become on with the Bloomers. The characters were interesting but their actions made about as much sense as the overall philosophy of the book. It was a good description of Nano but we've got those by the thousands. Next time Wil should use a focus group before going through with something as corny as this.

Lots of technical, detailed descriptions about the science behind the idea of nanotechnology gone amuck. If you like your hard sci-fi very hard this book is for you.

Really excellent hard SF. McCarthy makes the story both relevant and accessible, despite staying within the world of his story even in his use of language. I'll definitely be reading more McCarthy.

Charles Gramlich
Author of "Cold in the Light."

This book definitely disappointed me. The people on Earth screwed up in a bit way, creating a substance called mycora. It expanded exponentially and took over the place, and kept on going.

A few people got away. The rest of it to me seems very fuzzy and furry, and generally pretty dull.

The main idea brought forth in this book scared the heck out of me. The idea is that wandering nanotech could drift for ages, then suddenly "bloom", eating all matter in the vicinty, thus creating terrible destruction. The book would translate to film very well.

Sure, some of the characterization is weak, but that's not why we read hard-SF like this. The science and the ideas are key here, and Wil McCarthy delivers on both.

Here Harold Bloom puts his highly respected literary mind to work sharing what he gleans of the character of three literary figures - Jesus of Nazareth, Yahweh of the J author and Jesus Christ the Messiah. Like a good scholar, he carefully describes his primary sources - the "J" author of the Tanakh (female in his opinion), the Gospel of Mark and the Gnosis Gospel of Thomas.

He likewise describes his limitations, for example, a failure to understand Hinduism and Buddhism, and therefore, a failure to recognize that which is common across all religions. His limitations are also indicated by occasional factual errors, for example, stating that Catholic prayers are rarely to the Father. Similarly he defines "theology" to suit his own purposes to support his claim that Yahweh is not a theological God. (Constrast the traditional: theology "from Gk. theologia 'an account of the gods'").

Thus the book can rightly be called a literary analysis of that portion of the literary tradition of Yahweh/Jesus/Christ of personal interest to Bloom in which words come to mean what he declares them to mean. Within this context he provides an insightful view of Yahweh/Jesus/Christ as literary characters, often comparing and contrasting with Shakespearean characters from "Hamlet" and "King Lear". His analysis is provocative and, at times, brilliant. Consider this a must read for individuals with an interest in the Bible as literature - the scope may be narrow but the analysis is deep.

Uninformed reviewers are claiming that the author has lost track. But those who are familiar with his previous books and writings see it differently. Because the theme itself is elusive and delicate, the author brilliantly reshaped the approach accordingly. His perceptions might be -convergently- colorful, but the analyses are convincing. Mr. Bloom is a meticulous writer. And this current book reflects deep knowledge of the gospels. In summary, I highly recommend this book to both the scholar and the student. My rating is five stars.

Mr. Bloom has rented out his brain to Freud. Pity he has not spent as much energy studing the many volumes of Jung. He may find something enlightening. Instead he is like a dog chasing its tail, thinking that the tail is something other.

I knew when I was a 10 year old girl, sitting in a Southern Baptist Church, reading the great stories in the "Old Testament" and the words attributed to Jesus of Nazereth, that there was no reconciliation of the two books. I saw the danger in trying to justify Christian works with the words and deeds of that old curmudgeon of the Old Testament. Why does he consider Jehovah, Yaweh, God, the Lord, or whomever, any more real than Gitchi Manitou, or the Great White Buffalo?

This learned man cannot understand Buddhism??? I don't believe that. I understand it quite well and I am not quite so learned as Bloom.

For your own sake, read Jung...no; study Jung. It is more difficult than Buddhism, so you will really have to use your brain.

Professor Bloom perhaps is one of the top 5 literary critics in the U.S.,but in religion, he is a "magnificent failure" [ actual words he uses to describe St.Augustine!]. Though we still read St.Augustine 1,578 years after his passing, Bloom will not fare so well. Such a mess this book is, the evidence that a securalist-turned-atheist used the word "Jesus" to sell the book is overwhelming. Bloom is never dull, but he can be wrong. Buy a book by St. Augustine instead!

I really only recommend for those who have found Bloom's previous work rewarding. The book is his rumination on the "characters" of Jesus and Yahweh from a literary, cultural and religious perspective. The main reason for my caveat is that this book seemed sloppily tossed off in stream of consciousness mode. This made it a somewhat exasperating read for me even though I find Bloom to be an insightful thinker.

For those that don't know, Bloom is a prominent literary critic with a fairly unique perspective. His initial renown was for his Anxiety of Influence, which outlined his approach to criticism. I particularly enjoyed his take on The Western Canon in a subsequent book. He has expanded his attention to wider cultural and religious criticism in other books, and indeed it rings true that he would have long been ruminating on the relationship between Christianity and Judaism as the ultimate example of the "Anxiety" (fyi, Bloom is writing from a culturally but not particularly religious Jewish point of view). I was interested to find from this book that Bloom finds the Jesus of the Gospel of Mark in particular to be a compellingly "uncanny" character to rival the Yahweh of the "J" thread of what Christians call the "Old Testament".

Once upon a time, women devoured Danielle Steele type novels for summer or beachy reads. Now in the era of chick lit, you see a million sex and the city like Bridget Jones knockoffs, like Girl Anatomy, but this is awful. I was flabberghasted by the few positive reviews. The writing is terrible. the main character dull and self absorbed. I especially take issue with Miss Bloom's dialogue which is horribly written. SO MUCH telling and not showing. And just not distinct voice. HOW DID THIS GET PUBLISHED?
Incidentally, I was gifted this by a friend for my birthday and when she read it afterwards, she apologized. I agree with other posters in that you kind of hang out to see if the it'll ever redeem itself, you think it has to, but it never does. yes, the ING thing was very convoluted and made for a confusing, messy read too.

I agree with most of the negative reviews. The story is fine for light-hearted chick lit, but the writing is incredibly sloppy and makes reading more of a chore than a pleasure (which defeats the purpose of escapist fiction). I kept tripping over the clunky sentences. Bloom has an irritating habit of describing action ("ing" ing) while writing dialogue.

Here's an example:
"I don't know." Rolling to face him. "I do, but we haven't, and I'm leaving."

"I know, but does all that matter?" Caressing my face.

"Maybe, yes...I mean, what would it mean?" Running my fingers over his lips.

"Mean in what sense? Sex can't change our relationship even if we wanted it to." Pulling me closer to him.

The entire book is written in this fashion. I don't know whether this is a new technique they teach in writers class, but wherever Bloom learnt this she should know that it's extremely irritating and has caused me to throw the book down on a number of occasions.

Definitely a "don't recommend", there are much better examples of chick lit out there.

I was biased to begin with before I started reading Girl Anatomy, because I came on Amazon to see what other people were saying about it. After reading the reviews from the first page, I had an idea that this book would be bad. So I decided to read it on my lunch break, just to see how bad it is.

UGH! The worst thing about it to me, is exactly what another reviewer touched on-- the strange way the author writes. Instead of writing something like:

"I love you," I said, kissing his cheek.

"Love you too," he replied, hugging me.

She writes:

"I love you." Kissing his cheek.

"Love you too." Hugging me.

It drives me crazy! I have never seen this style of writing before, and I hate it.

The character of Lilly is also driving me crazy. (Yeah, I haven't even finished the book yet) I hate all the drugs and sleeping around. Even though that's been done plenty of times in other books, movies, etc, it seems really pathetic in this one. I'm just not liking the story.

I would recommend this book if you want to read something where you can just marvel and cringe at how bad it is. It's kind of amusing!

overall, this book was not at all boring. there was always something going on with the main character,lilly, whether she was reminicsing about ex lovers or impulse shopping out of unhappiness. interesting book, said a lot of things that made sense that just about any person could relate to when it comes to love.
it did have its cheesy moments and a few cliches, but its a solid book and you do see that lilly does mature and grows stronger as it goes on.

In the phenomenal novel Girl Anatomy, Rebecca Bloom artfully presents the story of a young woman yearning to discover her true love, but on the way she uncovers the beauty within herself. Throughout the novel, Lilly constantly takes part in interior monologues, revealing the inner struggle of who she is versus who she wants to be. Flashbacks are also extremely important in the characterization of those in the novel, helping the reader understand why a character acts a certain way. The plot seems to progress slowly due to the numerous flashbacks; however, without the history behind the characters to provide a sound foundation, the reader would not be able to appreciate Lilly's life changing transformation from a boy crazy college girl into a mature woman who experiences true, lasting love for the first time.
Lilly's insecurities are evident through her interior monologues. Her mind engages in battles over what she should do versus what she wishes she had never done. In the first half of the novel, these inner conversations are harsh and lengthy; however, as the story progresses and Lilly grows in confidence, she begins to agree more with her actions. There seems to be less arguments taking place in her mind. She is startled at first when she agrees with herself, but eventually her inner monologues disappear altogether. Lilly no longer needs the extra voice inside her head. She grows up and becomes comfortable in her own skin, ready to embrace her newfound chickdom.
While still on her path to self-discovery, Lilly's memories often surface to enlighten the reader's understanding of her character. These flashbacks occur at extremely odd times whenever something in Lilly's present sparks an incident from her past. Without the flashbacks in the novel, the reader would never have understood the great leap Lilly takes from her days of obsessing over boys to her reunion with Jonah. The reader learns through many flashbacks throughout the novel that Lilly goes through boy after boy, only to end up broken-hearted and alone. Thank goodness she has loving friends who are always there to cheer her up and give her good advice. Lilly realizes she has transformed into a mature adult when she herself gives Maya excellent marital advice. Lilly falls in love with her first love, Jonah, all over again. Yet this time, she and Jonah are mature enough to engage in a serious relationship. They are both ready to commit to one another; this doesn't immediately mean marriage, but they are both comfortable with being a "we" while still retaining their individual personalities.
The interior monologues and flashbacks present in Girl Anatomy effectively reveal Lilly Abrams's troubled nature. As the two devices decrease in usage, the author subtly portrays Lilly's growing maturity. She eventually is able to break free from her insecurities because of her loving relationship with Jonah. She learns that true love cannot be put on a schedule; it will happen when she least expects it. Being in a relationship does not mean losing her individuality; rather, she and Jonah feel more like themselves when they are together. She decides that in life, there is no such thing as a sure thing, but one must be willing to take a risk and pray for the best in order to truly live. Lilly Abrams experiences pure happiness when she can finally be with another person and not have to fight for peace within her own mind.