Boyd Books

Great book - Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War
if you like history!!! I was a member of the Officers Club that Boyd and his team met at. I never got to meet this genius - wish I had. The book is great and I have bought other books about Boyd's theories.

I had never heard of John Boyd, but I had read Coram's other excellent work about George "Bud" Day, so I decided to give this one a try as well. After reading both of these books, I would have to say that Coram ranks among the very top of military historians I have read. His books are well researched with hundreds of hours of personal interviews that clearly show through in the stories he presents.

The idea that a USAF fighter pilot ("excuse me, but I'm just a dumb fighter pilot") can change the way our military wages war is pretty far fetched indeed. But it happened. Boyd was brilliant- loud, brash, opinionated, extremely well read, but brilliant.

From his childhood in Erie Pennsylvania to his service in World War II, Korea, USAF Weapons School, Southeast Asia and finally in the Pentagon, Boyd knew how to make enemies. Coram paints a very balanced, thoughtful and insightful picture of John Boyd, his life and the times. And in the process, he brings real insights to the Pentagon, the top brass in each of the US Armed Forces. Nothing and no one is spared.

It's often said that "At the Pentagon, Colonels are emptying the trash cans." That would be over-simplifying things a bit, but the idea that someone of his lowly stature would have the ear of two Secretaries of Defense (SecDefs), Chiefs of Staff and other top brass speaks volumes to his influence. But that the Commandant of the Marine Corps was a huge fan of a former USAF fighter pilot is nothing short of amazing.

Ever wondered who came up with the famous "feint" and left hook attributed to "Stormin' Norman" Schwartzkopff? John Boyd, that's who, a lowly retired USAF Colonel who had the ear of Secretary of Defense Dick Cheyney.

If you find the works of Von Clausawitz and Sun Tsu of interest, get this book. Exhaustingly researched and very well written.

Boyd, a rough-cut diamond developed fighter jet theories and stuck to his guns with the hide-bound Pentagon brass. We would all be richer if more military officers quit saying "yes sir" and used their minds to act like Boyd did.Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War

If you want to change the world for the better or just keep your little corner of it from getting worse, then you'll want to read this book. It's not just about "the art of war," as the subtitle claims. It's what Boyd discovered about how conflicts are fought and won. Sadly, although he flew in two wars, most of Boyd's clashes were fought within our own military rather than with some foreign foe. As a result, one of the best USAF fighter pilots who ever lived is better remembered by the Marine Corps, where he is a hero, than by his own branch.

I'm not going spend time praising Boyd. The fact that I finished this book with a list of books and articles to read is praise enough. Instead, I'm going to offer a useful corrective to Boyd the man, by introducing someone else you should read.

That someone is G. K. Chesterton, an Englishman with a maverick, warrior personality every bit as fierce and unyielding as Boyd's. On June 1, 1941, on one of the darkest days in World War II, when the island of Crete had fallen to the Germans, leaving 17,000 British soldiers as prisoners of war, the Times of London, defiantly put these lines from Chesterton's "The Ballad of the White Horse" on its front page:

I tell you naught for your comfort,
Yea naught for your desire,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher.

Like Boyd, Chesterton understood that how we fight determines if we win or lose. He shared Boyd's contempt for those who believe that bigger is better. In a 1909 at the height of England's fears about new German battleships, Chesterton wrote precisely what Boyd would later say about fighter aircraft.

"Common-sense tells a man that indefinite development in one direction must in practice over-reach itself... If you perceive your enemy plunging on blindly in a particular direction, the real thing to do, if you have any spirit and invention, is to calculate the weakness in his course and advance yourself in some other direction. You ought to take advantage of his infatuation, not to imitate it; you ought to surprise his plan of campaign, not copy it laboriously. If he is building very big ships, the best thing you could do would probably be to build small ones; ships lighter, quicker, and more capable of navigating rivers."

But Chesterton understood something that Boyd never learned, an aspect of warfare that's so often forgotten today that the very word for it seems quaint--chivalry. Perhaps his best explanation of chivalry came in a 1906 article explaining why the Europe of his day dominated the world. Again Chesterton described a concept dear to Boyd, the power that comes from an ability to think new thoughts and imagine new ways of acting.

"The elements that make Europe upon the whole the most humanitarian civilisation are precisely the elements that make it upon the whole the strongest. For the power which makes a man able to entertain a good impulse is the same as that which enables him to make a good gun; it is imagination."

Boyd thought like a fighter pilot. He would have us understand a man in order to destroy him, knowing that a foe who's blown out of the air will never trouble you again. As a writer, Chesterton had a different perspective. He believed that understanding leads to restraint, writing in that same article: "For if you do not understand a man you cannot crush him. And if you do understand him, very probably you will not."

Chesterton saw conflict in broad terms. When he clashed with H. G. Wells over the latter's infatuation with a World State or with Bernard Shaw over pacifism, he took the time to understand what each was saying. His criticisms of the dangers and weakness of international institutions are among the best ever written. His description of the pacifist personality is so accurate that it applies with near perfection to today's pacifists. But having gotten into the mind of his opponent, he recognized in him a fellow human being. With few exceptions, he retained the respect and even friendship of his foes. Only when one crossed a critical line, demonstrating that without great pain he was beyond redemption, would Chesterton seek to crush him to prevent the evil he intended. What was for Boyd the rule, destroying anyone who disagree with him, was for Chesterton the rare exception. Boyd needs to be tempered with Chesterton

In short, I'd suggest that, as you read what Boyd said about war and conflict, you also read what Chesterton wrote. You'll accomplish a lot more and suffer far less grief if you do. And as you might suspect, I wrote a book on that topic, a collection of Chesterton's best articles on war and peace paying particular attention to his warnings about Germany. And when the necessity arose, Chesterton could be as tough-minded as Boyd. Chesterton used all his powers as a writer to crush those ideas in the German mind that Nazism would later exploit.

--Michael W. Perry, editor of Chesterton on War and Peace: Battling the Ideas and Movements that Led to Nazism and World War II

If you want to change the world for the better or just keep your little corner of it from getting worse, then you'll want to read this book. It's not just about "the art of war," as the subtitle claims. It's what Boyd discovered about how conflicts are fought and won. Sadly, although he flew in two wars, most of Boyd's clashes were fought within our own military rather than with some foreign foe. As a result, one of the best USAF fighter pilots who ever lived is better remembered by the Marine Corps, where he is a hero, than by his own branch.

I'm not going spend time praising Boyd. The fact that I finished this book with a list of books and articles to read is praise enough. Instead, I'm going to offer a useful corrective to Boyd the man, by introducing someone else you should read.

That someone is G. K. Chesterton, an Englishman with a maverick, warrior personality every bit as fierce and unyielding as Boyd's. On June 1, 1941, on one of the darkest days in World War II, when the island of Crete had fallen to the Germans, leaving 17,000 British soldiers as prisoners of war, the Times of London, defiantly put these lines from Chesterton's "The Ballad of the White Horse" on its front page:

I tell you naught for your comfort,
Yea naught for your desire,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher.

Like Boyd, Chesterton understood that how we fight determines if we win or lose. He shared Boyd's contempt for those who believe that bigger is better. In a 1909 at the height of England's fears about new German battleships, Chesterton wrote precisely what Boyd would later say about fighter aircraft.

"Common-sense tells a man that indefinite development in one direction must in practice over-reach itself... If you perceive your enemy plunging on blindly in a particular direction, the real thing to do, if you have any spirit and invention, is to calculate the weakness in his course and advance yourself in some other direction. You ought to take advantage of his infatuation, not to imitate it; you ought to surprise his plan of campaign, not copy it laboriously. If he is building very big ships, the best thing you could do would probably be to build small ones; ships lighter, quicker, and more capable of navigating rivers."

But Chesterton understood something that Boyd never learned, an aspect of warfare that's so often forgotten today that the very word for it seems quaint--chivalry. Perhaps his best explanation of chivalry came in a 1906 article explaining why the Europe of his day dominated the world. Again Chesterton described a concept dear to Boyd, the power that comes from an ability to think new thoughts and imagine new ways of acting.

"The elements that make Europe upon the whole the most humanitarian civilisation are precisely the elements that make it upon the whole the strongest. For the power which makes a man able to entertain a good impulse is the same as that which enables him to make a good gun; it is imagination."

Boyd thought like a fighter pilot. He would have us understand a man in order to destroy him, knowing that a foe who's blown out of the air will never trouble you again. As a writer, Chesterton had a different perspective. He believed that understanding leads to restraint, writing in that same article: "For if you do not understand a man you cannot crush him. And if you do understand him, very probably you will not."

Chesterton saw conflict in broad terms. When he clashed with H. G. Wells over the latter's infatuation with a World State or with Bernard Shaw over pacifism, he took the time to understand what each was saying. His criticisms of the dangers and weakness of international institutions are among the best ever written. His description of the pacifist personality is so accurate that it applies with near perfection to today's pacifists. But having gotten into the mind of his opponent, he recognized in him a fellow human being. With few exceptions, he retained the respect and even friendship of his foes. Only when one crossed a critical line, demonstrating that without great pain he was beyond redemption, would Chesterton seek to crush him to prevent the evil he intended. What was for Boyd the rule, destroying anyone who disagree with him, was for Chesterton the rare exception. Boyd needs to be tempered with Chesterton

In short, I'd suggest that, as you read what Boyd said about war and conflict, you also read what Chesterton wrote. You'll accomplish a lot more and suffer far less grief if you do. And as you might suspect, I wrote a book on that topic, a collection of Chesterton's best articles on war and peace paying particular attention to his warnings about Germany. And when the necessity arose, Chesterton could be as tough-minded as Boyd. Chesterton used all his powers as a writer to crush those ideas in the German mind that Nazism would later exploit.

--Michael W. Perry, editor of Chesterton on War and Peace: Battling the Ideas and Movements that Led to Nazism and World War II

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.

I picked this up because this book was tagged as Anne Rice with werewolves. This is no where near up to par with Anne Rice or anything I've read lately. There is entirely too much detail here about mundane things for my taste. I loved the beginning, I thought this would be a mystery about the dead werewolves and half werewolf found in a house, but no, it turns into a history lesson. I was annoyed with all of the characters and I couldn't get over the blandness. I need dialogue in a book, not a 10 page description of what a room in a mansion looks like. This book is very very slow and uninteresting. I wouldn't recommend it. I couldn't even finish it no matter how much I wanted to find out about the half werewolf. Yawn.

I bought this thinking it was a romance. Well, I guess I thought it would have a stronger "erotica" undertone. This isn't really what most would consider a paranormal romance. The author is very talanted, and I simply really liked the book. Even if it didn't have any graphic sex.

This is a very good book. I purchased this as a gift for my daughter. She loves Donna Boyd's writing.

The story starts out slow, but gets better in the middle. By the end of the book, I was interested. There's a lot of narration, more telling than showing. I think the books should have been edited better. It could have been shorter.

Werewolves, with brilliant intelligence and devastating beauty, live at peace amongst and above normal humans, running a business conglomeration that rules the Western world. But after the violent death of three werewolves leaves the scent of human on the scene, Alexander, the leader of the werewolf pack, must reveal secrets he has long kept hidden, secrets which will redefine human and werewolf relations: he tells his son and heir a love story about werewolves and a human woman. Boyd's werewolves are unique--artisans, philosophers, and businessmen, they do not live on the fringes of society but instead rule over it. However, Boyd's werewolves also stretch hyperbole to the limit, and they are so stunning, so perfect, so aloof that her novel reads like bad fanfiction. The plot and writing style are unremarkable and the characterization is ludicrous, and so this book is mediocre at best. Although it is an interesting deviation from usual werewolf stereotypes, I don't recommend it.

"In the bright light of day [...] these two could not have passed unnoticed. Eyebrows would be raised, sentences would be left unfinished, small backward steps would be taken to clear a path as they walked by. Head would turn, gazes would follow, and for the space of a second, maybe more, thoughts would stutter and be forgotten. Later, someone might remark upon how tall and striking they looked, or how powerful they seemed. That was all.

"In this dark dead hour of the morning no one was about to notice them. Yet the night seemed to hold its breath until they passed (9)."

So begins The Passion, and here first impressions are reliable: so the book continues for the next 400 pages. Were werewolves are usually categorized as dark and dangerous strangers who live around the fringes of society, hidden from humanity and tied to their bestial nature, Boyd's werewolves break from the norm: perhaps still dark and dangerous, they are also beautiful, intelligent, and cultured--not only more cultured than humans, they created what humans recognize as "culture." They also have unconventional breeding practices, and humans cannot become werewolves. They still turn into wolves in a magical transformation they call the Passion, but on the whole this is a different sort of werewolf.

However, in her attempt to make a new sort of werewolf and to characterize these werewolves, Boyd relies on exaggeration. The quote illustrates it, and so it continues through the rest of the book. These werewolves are so beautiful as to strike humans dumb, their wit and intelligence defies description, their characterization stretches hyperbole to its breaking point. Worse, the narrator is often a werewolf, and his aloof pride only exacerbates the point. The werewolves are simply too perfect, so perfect that they seem like the "Gary Stu"s of bad fanfiction: idealized, exaggerated, and wholly unbelievable.

A combination of socio-political drama and love story, the plot has its fair number of interesting twists and logical conclusions, but it's nothing special and the resolutions are sometimes too convenient. The framed narration is abrupt and addresses the reader, which breaks the fourth wall and makes it impossible to suspend disbelief as the book requires. The narrative voice tries for lush and distinctive but manages only repetitive descriptions and constant exaggeration. Yes, the book remains readable, but it certainly isn't good, and the exaggeration can be inadvertently humorous. I heard of this book through a list of recommended werewolf novels, and I am glad to see a new take on werewolf clichés, but I was disappointed by The Passion. It is mediocre at best, and a thorough waste of time. I do not recommend it.

Sorry to have to disagree with all those folks who gave it 4 0r 5 stars, but this is my truthful opinion. In my title, I said "enthralling". The first narrative of the overseer, over one third of the book, was great fun. His idiosyncrasies and droll way of looking at the other characters was quite delightful. The tale itself was unfolding in a way that continued to whet one's interest as more and more unexplainable and outrageous developments occurred. What a fizzle the rest of the book proved to be! Tedious prolongation of the suspense and an unbelievable resolution resulted in irritation at having wrapped up precious reading time. The book may have historical interest as being a pioneering manifestation of the detective novel, but that isn't enough to provide a satisfying reading experience for me. Due to the glowing reviews, I had expected something with more psychological or metaphysical depth. If the author had only carried through on the promise of the first narrative, I think it would indeed have been a great book.

The Moonstone was recommended to me by my cousin during a recent trip to Ireland. I must say that at first, I had a hard time getting into the book, but then I was absorbed by the well-crafted and realistic characters. Though these characters would have "lived" about 150 years ago, they jumped off the page with their idiosyncrasies and humorous outlook on life. The only complaint that I have about the characters is that their names were a bit heavy-handed, falling under the guise of "charactonyms", such Mr. Bruff, the grumpy family attorney, and Godfrey Ablewhite, the overly-involved church volunteer. The tales of Miss Clack and Mr. Betteridge caused me to intermittently laugh out loud, and Mr. Betteridge's devotion to Robinson Crusoe as his chosen life anthem was priceless.

Pastiche Victorian mystery and adventure tales are currently in vogue; but why settle for an imitation when you can read the real thing?

The Moonstone is at heart a mystery and detective story about a lost diamond. The gem is a sacred Indian artefact that carries a curse, and it leaves a trail of confusion and ruin in its path. Only the virtuous are likely to survive it, and when young heiress Rachel Verinder is bequeathed the stone by an evil uncle, her love, reputation and marriage plans are immediately thrown upside down. And the theft proves equally fateful to the host of family relations, servants, friends and professional detectives who join in to help the reader solve this artfully constructed case.

But Wilkie Collins's novel, written in the era of Dickens and George Eliot, is also a commentary on the time and mores. Five principal voices, of different social and intellectual standing, alternate as the narrator, each bringing its own colour, and this helps the book pick through such archetypes as the faithful old butler, the bigoted poor relation, and the pusillanimous cousin, as well as offer glimpses of contemporary attitudes to scientific enquiry, drugs, superstition, and the law. The dialogues are equally truthful. Indeed, The Moonstone is a pleasure to read, subtly written and constantly amusing. And importantly, it skirts the pitfalls of Victorian prejudice, whether social, religious or racial. This surprising book ranks alongside the better known 19th century classics and is not to be missed.

I am not a big fan of mystery novels. However, I'd have to agree that
"The Moonstone" may not only the first and longest, but also the best
detective novel ever written. The story is told from the viewpoint of a number
of characters, and the writing style varies accordingly. The storytellers vividly
paint the different characters, while they are themselves brought to life
through the idiosyncracies of their writing. There is not a single, central
mystery, but a web of unexplained occurrences and actions that each writer
presents from his or her own view, adding bits of information in the process.
Therefore the fun is as much in the construction of the web of mysteries
surrounding the disappearance of the Moonstone, as in the eventual resolution.

The plot is somewhat intricate, but not too difficult to follow. In brief, a very
satisfying book.

I have to admit that until I did a mystery search, I hadn't even heard of Wilkie Collins. Wilkie Collins name came up, along with a description of The Moonstone as being "the best of modern English detective novels" (as quoted by T.S.Eliot). Big words, indeed. With those lofty expectations, I read The Moonstone, and have to say that this mystery definitely delivered. It lived up to those words.

One of the finer aspects of Collins work is his creation of mood and suspense in the story. There is a feeling of expectation and suspense from the beginning, when the moonstone is stolen, to the case of trying to find out who stole it, to the unmasking of events, people and circumstances at the end. There is a marvelous ability to create narrative point of view from the many narratives told from the various characters. And there are many--eleven different narratives--in total. From Gabriel Betteredge to Franklin Blake to Sergeant Cuff to Miss Clack and other minor characters, Collins is able to change narrative persona and "become" that person. There is a good deal of intrigue from so many voices, because, quite frankly, you do not know if you can take what the person is saying at face value. In this way, the human element of perspective is amazingly effective in telling this mystery.

There are other elements that make this a worthy mystery. Namely, you have a diverse number of characters, who have their various motives. Throw in a love affair, a tragic character, and an exotic jewel with a curse put on it, and you have quite a remarkable suspense. I have to say that I was hooked.

As far as my own personal interests, I found Sergeant Cuff to be my favorite character. Surely, he's no Sherlock Holmes, but there is a way he goes about trying to solve the mystery that I found refreshing. He's no average sleuth. One of my favorite scenes was the "experiment" performed by Ezra Jennings in relation to the events leading up to the disappearance of the moonstone.

There is also a little comic relief thrown in from time to time in the person of Gabriel Betteredge, who believes that life's answers and secret are all contained in Daniel Defoe's Robinson Crusoe.

The Moonstone is an engaging work, highly detailed, and maybe a little implausible, but Collin's overcomes this. I'm glad I found this one, and I've also heard good things about The Woman in White, another Collins mystery. Definitely worth a read!

A very Powerful read!
I am sure very Controversial read for many.
But I did understand what the writer was talking about.
A very good point how Religion is being used and abused in today's America

Boyd does not take a stance of being republican or democratic. I was a little skeptical about reading this book at first because I do not like politics very much and thought that was what Boyd was going to be pushing. Boy was I wrong. Boyd talks about the difference between the Kingdom of the World and the Kingdom of God. He opened my eyes up to God's Kingdom in a way I had never really viewed it before. This is a great read to stretch you current views, and open your mind to being mindful of things that are important to God.

I was so blessed to have had two evangelicals in my life (first 3 to 4 years ago a protestant one, then until very recently a Catholic one) and to get to spend hours and hours a day in professional contact with them. Both, however, seemed to want to twist my arm a bit in order to think that being conservative was really the only holy, sanctified choice. The Catholic one, beloved, even had a minion of his (keep in mind that minion originally implied protege and favor and of royal blood in a royal court) tell me that our group was "conservative". By wILLing such a thing, it was a sort of mortal blow to my belief in our relation. Just because leading political conservatives tend to be evangelicals does not mean that their politics should be considered related (at best i think it's 50/50 for the best of them being right as it is for the the best of the liberals being right, though this is not an endorse of German/Kant/Hegel/Karl Bart dialectical philosophy/theology...that's just bunk to someone like myself of a non-German, Anglo-American culture...not to a good-evil Christ/anti-christ idea...dialectical has no meaning outside the German Culture. Period.) I've never, ever for a second thought that George W. Bush's political decision could ever be considered right with God (though I must agree with my biological father's phenomenal jokes about this second president Bush is just too damn stupid to be the anti-Christ). In fact, I more than respect conservative values, actually I embrace them. But I don't disrespect liberal values (in life nor in politics), so much so that I started experimenting with them not just in my earlier spirit of tolerance but in life itself (conclusion/result: I'm not really built for liberal values...they don't really work so well for me). Such experiments have actually been fueled and enflamed by subtle, but firm pushes from these two deeply respected evangelicals towards conservative political values. (odd but true)

Anyhow, this book's message is amazing. I doubt even the pope of the Catholic Church would ever have the courage or ability to say what Gregory A Boyd is saying.

Gregory A. Boyd's controversial work is actually a collection of a series of sermons he gave at his church, Woodland Hills Church in St. Paul, Minnesota. The title reads like a historical treatment, but is actually a call to practice spirituality outside of the realms of nationality and politics.

Boyd develops two premises: he describes the Kingdom of the Sword, which is the mindset of the world, and the Kingdom of the Cross, which is a mindset that resembles Christ. He proposes that we have become to entrenched in the Kingdom of the Sword, and cannot see the way that Christ has shown us, i.e. the Kingdom of the Cross.

Boyd also empahsizes that being Christian means to follow and look like Christ. Therefore, a Christian nation should follow and look like Christ. The question is asked: does America bear fruit? Does this nation have a history of following and looking like Christ? Comparisons to Israel are made, but not in the usual "city on a hill" way. Boyd destroys the perception of America as moral guardian, instead pointing readers to the Bible as the authority on sin. There is also a question and answer format in the last chapter, discussing many of the tough questions he has been asked over the course of presenting these sermons.

This is a good book to read, especially in such politically dividing times. Boyd approaches the topic humbly, realizing that he still has room to grow. He doesn't claim to have mastered or even reached the lofty goals he proposes, but instead relies on the grace of God to eventually carry him to their end.

Originally posted at http://scandaloussanity.blogspot.com

I just recently finsihed reading Gregory Boyd's book entitled, The Myth Of A Christian Nation. I was given this book as a gift from a friend who happens to be a Freewill Baptist Minister. At last there is hope! This book should be a required reading for every church member. The people in this country are so ignorant of real history and of the true tenents of Jesus' ministry. This is not one of those books that attempts to label the forefathers as die-hard Diests, although their Diestic tendencies are mentioned. Boyd does a wonderful job comparing the differences between the Kingdom of the World and the Kingdom of God. This thought-provoking work will certainly find a permanent place on my shelf!

Randall F. Hubbard
History Teacher
Springville, Alabama

I read all three in this series of "Alternative History" and found the first two fascinating reading and all three were page turners. The last, however left me with more issues that I could not resolve. The end result was as expected. Lee surrenders. I could accept all of the alternative presentations and battles but I could not accept George Armstrong Custer being killed in a battle. What will happen at the "Little Big Horn"?

The first volume covers the battle of Gettysburg, though with strategic maneuvers beyond anything contemplated by the actual participants. Like any successful counterfactual history, the authors are careful in their initial changes - in fact, most readers will not even be aware of the changes in the battle to after the end of the first day's fighting, but by this point many small changes have already occurred - enough changes in fact to lead Lee to a strategic masterstroke on a par with Jackson's Chancellorsville march. From here the story rapidly diverges from what we know as history, but never beyond possibility, and it's amusing to see various participants like Sykes, Sickles, Joshua Chamberlain and others perform in this parallel universe.
The battles scenes are excellent and provide a closeup look at the experience of individual troops. They note often how the opposing sides would arrange unofficial truces when the battles end. You'll probably suspect that the climactic battle of the second book won't resolve everything since there's still that third volume! But that never subtracts from the tension & suspense of these books. Great history - my only regret is that Gingrich didn't start writing novels earlier, rather than spending so much time fighting other battles in Congress.

One small annoyance is the tendency of the authors to put anachronistic quotes in the mouths of their actors. The most prominent one was during a race between the armies towards the coast in which a general remarks let the man on the farthest edge of the flanking troops touch the sea with his sleeve" - a statement actually made 50 years later by the German general during their flanking attack through Belgium. There are several more of these pillaged pedantries scattered thru the books, but their effect is minimal.

This historical novel is the third and final part of a trilogy that began with Gettysburg, and as the title suggests, this volume chronicles the final stages of the Civil War. The trilogy begins during the Battle of Gettysburg, and describes how the course of the war might have changed had General Lee taken General Longstreet's advice at the end of the second day of battle. What follows is a riveting account of the rest of the "alternate Civil War". The authors describe strategy, tactics, and battle scenes with great realism, and all the developments were easier to follow than the "real thing". Character development was very thorough and added a great deal to the over all understanding of the events (I hope not too much "fictional license" was taken).

Overall, this book was an excellent read, as was the entire trilogy. I think they would be worthwhile to the most casual student of the Civil War.

Gingrich and Fortschen have written an excellent conclusion to their alternative history of the Civil War. AS I stated in my review of the first book, those of us who grew up in the south have lived with the "what if?" Questions our whole life. The first volume of this series posits a Confederate victory in the Gettysburg campaign. But even with that victory could the Confederacy have pushed the campaign to victory and what would have been required to acheive that victory.

The authors have done an excellent job of taking into account the difficulty of capturing Washington and the overwhelming superiority of men and material the Federal forces had. To win this war, it would have required a quick knockout after July 4, 1663. this book shows why this would have been difficult. The difficulties in controlling a captive population, sabotage, internal weakness of the confederate government all are taken into account in this book. I think the embrace of "colored" troops and the army of workers is probably a stretch.

The book involves a short period around on final conclusive battle in Maryland, not far from the site of the Battle of Sharpsburg. The carnage is overwhelming, but in comparison to Cold Harbor, it seems feasible. The authors show an excellent knowledge of the area the battle is fought on.

I enjoyed the trilogy. It was fun fiction, but it also helps the reader to address the 'what if's" Recommend

"Never Call Retreat: Lee and Grant-The Final Victory. Thomas Donne Books, St. Martin's Press, New York. 496 pages with maps and numerous Civil War Photographs. Hardcover 2005/Softcover 2006.
"Never Call Retreat" is the dramatic conclusion to the Civil War trilogy penned by Newt Gingrich, past Speaker of the House and William R. Forstchen, Ph. D., history professor at Montreat College which attempts, in part, to answer the question: "Could the South have won the American Civil War?".
The "yes or no" answer to tha question is forcefully and with knowledgeable insight presented in the conclusion of this spellbinding fictionalized account of the final weeks of the war. Before the conclusion is reached many notable persons and their actions are presented. Custer, Longstreet, Jackson, Stuart, Sheridan and Sherman all are provided their due in the pages of historical time and place.
Lincoln, Grant and Lee, being the principal players in this the bloodiest conflict endured by this nation are shown to be men of strong religious backgrounds and beliefs. All abhor the human suffering and loss endured by the combatants. They are also shown to be cognizant of the pain, worry and heartbreak borne upon the mothers, wives, sweethearts, children and other family members.
"Never Call Retreat" does not skin over the events of the day. The vivid details of moving an artillery piece to the line of battle over a road knee deep in mud down to including the loss of a trooper's boot sucked up by the mud brings the reader to feel he is by the near wayside observing if not in the mud itself straining and sweating in compnay with the combatants.
The action(s) provide hours of excitement worthy of the James Bond 007 thrillers such as: two steam locomotives sent hurtling down the tracks towards each other to collide head on at the center of the bridge. The resulting explosion caused by the impact plus the tremendous rupture of the steam boilers renders the bridge to the devastation and destruction intended.
Also the maniac charges of the Confederates again and again against the three-inch ordnance rifles loaded with double cannister (100.50cal steel balls) is as strong an epistle of man's animal indecencies as this reviewer has had occasion to have read. Grant's compassion is revealed when he orders his artillery commander: "For God's sake, Henry hold fire", stopping the harvest of human flesh likened to the sweep of a sickle through a field of wheat. "Never Call Retreat" should be required reading and study by all politicians, especially those arm-chair types who advocate military action but have never been on the receiving end of shots fired in anger.
The filling of canteens down stream from the scene of battle with water streaked pink by blood is another meticulous description of the gruesome nature of warfare.
The reader is again and again skillfully brought into the narrative to be one and the same as if he is subjective rather than objective in nature. He becomes an insider rather than an observer while reading the insightful narrative of the building of the pontoon bridge. The descriptive wording of the difficult straining to implant a king-pin to secure the bridge spans is felt as is the spray of the waters of the river.
After the defeat General Robert E. Lee addresses the Confederate Assembly with words that are as meaningful as the words of Atticus Finch (a.k.a. Gregory Peck) in his summation to the jury in "To Kill a Mockingbird". He asks that the hostilities cease and that all, North and South, start to mend and bring the opposing forces into a unified union.
The novel alternates between the White House, The Northern and Southern armies in a time sequence used by the author W.E.B. Griffin. The days/dates do not relate to the times of the actual war, and the reader must keep in mind that this is fiction.
Could the South have won the war? The authors say NO! I suggest you read the book and draw your own conclusion.

How explain literary genius? How pinpoint the DNA which made three Yorkshire girls living in a rundown parsonage world famous authors? "The Tenant of Wildfell Hall" author is Anne the youngest of the Bronte sisters. This novel is little known but is still an excellent example of Victorian fiction at its best. The novel is set in the Regency period and deals with a mysterious widow who becomes the tenant of the rundown estate called Wildfell Hall. She is the subject of gossip in the small town close to the old estate. Gilbert Markham falls in love with her.
The book begins with a glance backward to 1827 by the first person narrator Gilbert Markham who is a farmer. We meet Gilbert, his siblings Rose and Fergus as well as their grumpy mother. This first 115 pages show us social comedy as Gilbert is the romantic beau ideal of a fatuous preacher's daughter. He sees Markham becoming friendly with Helen and her young son Arthur. Gilbert sees Helen with a man thinking she is proving untrue to their burgeoning romance. Later we will learn that the enigmatic stranger is none other than her brother! Helen gives Gilbert a diary which consists of about 300 pages in the novel. In this diary she tells her sad tale. After his all night perusal of the diary the fiery Gilbert is convinced Helen is worthy of his love and protection.
Helen was wed to a rakish, drunk named Arthur Hunington who takes her to his home at Grassdale. Arthur lives a dissolute life. He is lazy, unkind to animals and socializes with sleazy aristocrats. He carries on an affair with the stupid Annabella leading to Helen's leaving him.
The novel is a love story, an indictment against alcoholism and a story well told with well sketched characters to hold your attention.
I thought it interesting that "Wildfell Hall" has the same "WH" as does Emily Bronte's more famous "Wuthering Heights." I also noted that the heroine of Anne's novel is "Helen". Did this remind the youngest Bronte of elder sister Charlotte's memorable tragic child "Helen Burns" a student at Lowood School in Jane Eyre? The novel is also influenced by the 1700 page eighteenth century letter novel "Clarissa" by Samuel Richardson.
Anne Bronte died at the young age of 29 with her potential unrealized. She did produce this fine book and her other classic "Agnes Grey." She is worth a read! A good book to curl up with on a dark and stormy night!

I loved this story. I was a bit surprised by the content, considering the time the book was written. The story went deeper than I had thought it would, very enjoyable read. If you like Charlotte's books, you will love this one.

The romantic ending was much too brief after the long story leading up to it, but it was a good read.

I agree, having read the book, that Gilbert was brutish and at times overyly "girlish" in expressing his emotions. The ending was rather abrupt. But because it's just from letters, that's to be expected.

The elaborate Victorian prose style of The Tenant of Wildfell Hall does not obscure a story that is recognizably modern--that of an idealistic young woman who wants to save her brutish, alcoholic husband from himself.

Reviled for its "morbid love for the coarse, not to say the brutal," The Tenant of Wildfell Hall continues the theme Brontë began in Agnes Gray--that nurture's role in shaping in a person's character and future is more important than parents and other authority figures realize or take responsibility for. As Helen says of Arthur, she wants "to do my utmost to . . . make him what he would have been if he had not, from the beginning, had a bad, selfish, miserly father . . . and a foolish mother who indulged him to the top of his bent . . . doing her utmost to encourage those germs of folly and vice it was her duty to suppress."

Helen's background is also revealing. Raised by her uncle and aunt, she exemplifies the modern concept of the adult child of an alcoholic--self-righteous and controlling. Knowing that Arthur is flawed, she marries him with the objective of changing him and saving him for God. It can be speculated that Arthur, intrigued by Helen's youth, beauty, passion, and apparent demureness, envisions making her a more worldly woman. Neither knows the other beyond the surface, and each seems to want to transform the other into his or her own image. This is not the basis for a happy or durable union, as Helen learns.

Failing to control the father, Helen turns her attentions to her son. Quite rightly, she is horrified when Arthur makes his son a pawn in their marital battle, teaching him the manly Victorian arts of sport and predation, love of drinking and carousing, camaraderie without friendship, and disrespect for and the subjugation of women. Even Brontë seemed to be aware that Helen's approach is also disturbing in its own way, for the child-rearing debate between Helen and her new neighbors is the basis for an entire chapter before we learn her history. While many of Brontë's contemporaries would have agreed with the vicar's argument that experience builds character, Helen slowly reveals how experience of the wrong kind without a moderating influence can destroy character.

The structure of the novel is undoubtedly awkward; it is unlikely that anyone would share such intimate details and thoughts as well as another person's entire personal journal with even the dearest friend without a compelling reason. Gilbert, who is introduced, perhaps symbolically, as a hunter of predators (hawks), disappears from the story as he reads Helen's tale. This diminishes him, relegating him to Helen's redemption and reward. On occasion, for example, in "Domestic Scenes," Brontë's tense changes and irregularities make Helen's journal lose its currency and distract the reader with lapses into a novel-like tone.

The structure does, however, allow the reader (and Gilbert) to meet the reclusive, protective, guarded, almost-grim Helen before we find out about the life that has shaped her and her inflexible opinions. The revelation of her character, and the strength she has to flout convention when her conscience and sense of duty require it, helps to complete Gilbert's growth from sarcastic village wit to the kind of mature man more worthy of her.

Brontë's stated purpose was "to tell the truth, for the truth always conveys its own moral to those who are able to receive it . . . Let it not be imagined, however, that I consider myself competent to reform the errors and abuses of society, but only that I would fain contribute my humble quota towards so good an aim . . . ." Helen's story, like that of Agnes, reveals the uglier aspects of Victorian family life, usually idealized, that resulted when women had few rights, men abused theirs, parents did not take responsibility for instilling healthy values (such as respect for life) in their children, and divorce was out of the reach of most. Beyond the impressive gates and parks, within the stately estates, behind the closed doors, lurked family and social problems that could not be hidden or denied away. Helen's story was disturbing not because of her depiction of Arthur's demeaning, childish, and amoral behavior, but because she exposes the falseness of the idyllic family life her society held dear and because she is willing to abandon what society considers her duty to her marriage to perform her real duty to herself and her son.

Anne Brontë's work has been compared unfavorably to that of her sisters, Charlotte and Emily. Yet its psychological insights, including the very coarseness and brutality of which contemporary critics complained, make up for Brontë's lack of literary finesse. Her portrayal of Arthur, the fun-loving, amoral, pettish, selfish hedonist, and his boorish social circle resonates today. Despite his country gentleman status and his debt-supported wealth, Arthur is recognizable in all times and classes. Helen, too, is familiar as the long-suffering wife who finally takes action when her child is threatened.

Although much has changed since Brontë's time, her characterizations and insights on family life hold true today, making The Tenant of Wildfell Hall a classic in its own right.

An Na writes a wonderful story about a four year old Korean-born girl moves to the United States with her mother and father. Even though, the main character faces many challenges in her young life, including an alcoholic father and physical abuse, she is able to persevere and see many of her dreams and those of her mother come true.

An Na is very deserving of the Michael Printz award as well as the many others this book received.

The reader is able to see Young Ju grow up through the writing style. The beginning of the book is written as the memories of a young child and moves to the thoughts and life events of a young adult. It would open up many conversations about different cultures as well as difficulties that any student may face as a teen in the United States.

An Na is originally from Korea, but she grew up in the United States, specifically, San Diego, California. She was a middle school English and history teacher before becoming a writer. HShe has written Two other novels as well, The Fold and Wait for me.

"A Step from Heaven" is An Na's first novel. Published in 2001, the book has received a lot of praise in reviews as well as winning the 2002 Printz Award (for excellence in young adult literature). The reason I like this book (and have added it to my CLW line up) is that the story shows the character's evolution as she works to become a stronger, more empowered individual.

Young Ju lives in Korea in a lovely house near the sea with her parents and her grandmother. Everything changes for Young Ju when Uhmma and Apa start talking about Mi Gook. Apa stops hurting Uhmma and scaring Young Ju and his mother. Mi Gook is a magic word for the Park family. Until Young Ju realizes that Mi Gook doesn't mean heaven like she thought--instead it means moving far away to a strange place called America where nothing is as magical (or easy) as the family had thought it would be.

The novel starts when Young Ju is four, before she knows the word "Mi Gook" and is being introduced to the water and waves. The story ends when Young Ju is about to start college. In between, Na weaves together a series of vignettes to show what life is like for the Parks in America. The story is about the immigrant experience, but even more than that it's about family--very specifically: it's about this family, the Parks.

Stylistically, this novel is a dynamo. Na incorporates Korean words and phrases into the novel from the get go. With a couple of exceptions, she doesn't translate within the text. This does two things: on one hand it makes the novel feel more real in that the narrative (the story is narrated by Young Ju who becomes a more reliable narrator as she gets older) is not interrupted by translations meant to benefit the reader. On the other hand, it gets a little confusing because no translations also means no context for the words. That led to a bit of a stumble when I first started the novel and couldn't decided if Uhmma meant "grandmother" or "mother" (it means "mother" by the way, "Apa" is father and Halmoni means "grandmother). Eventually I had to look up the words online and reread the first couple of pages--but after that it was smooth sailing.

More impressive, and equally effective, is the way that Na subtly alters her prose as Young Ju ages and becomes more familiar with English. The novel is written in the first person, present tense. The beginning of the story told in short, poetic fragments. Even the beginning chapter/vignettes are shorter than those at the end. The sentences get longer (arguably more complex) through the course of the novel.

Na also maintains both Korean and English throughout the novel. Korean appears in phrases throughout and as dialogue without quotations marks. (English dialogue is presented conventionally which makes it easy to note when the characters switch back and forth.)

As the Park family tries to cope with the hardships of American life it becomes clear that their family might not be strong enough to take all of the pressure. By the end of the novel though, after both Young Ju and Uhmma face some dramatic changes, readers leave with the sense that--after so long--the Parks are finally on their way to that elusive American dream.

Katherine
03-04-08
Period 2
One Immigrant's Experience
A Step from Heaven by An Na is the winner of the 2002 Michael L. Printz Award, and a 2001 National Book Award Finalist. It is narrated by a Korean immigrant, Young Ju Park. As young child, her family decides to move to "Mi Gook", America. From the stories of her faithful-Christian grandma, Young Ju is convinced to believe that America is heaven. However, soon she finds out that America is far from heaven. As a young child to a high school graduate, Young Ju fights through many obstacles. In school, she encounters through acceptance, struggling to learn English, and making new friends. At home, she must survive through her father's sexism attitude, depression, and alcoholism causing violent behavior, such as, verbal and physical abuse towards her mother. She also feels that her parents only care about her new baby brother, so she fights for attention. Even with all these great problems, Young Ju struggles through still remaining a Korean heritage while trying to fit in as and American girl. Throughout Young Ju's life, she feels like she is "a step from heaven", but not exactly there. As she grows up, she starts to find her identity and starts to speak out. By the end, she is seen as a respectable, admirable, inspiring, young woman. We are able to see her transformation from a young, clueless girl to a girl with great wisdom and courage.
The author, An Na was born in Korea and grew up in San Diego, California. She says she wrote this book to "express some of the longings and frustrations that [she] felt as an immigrant growing up in America", similar to Young Ju. An Na accurately captured the experience if being and immigrant in America. Through this book, An Na powerfully described the immigrant experience. When I first read the blurb, I thought it would be an ordinary book about the struggle with immigrants. However, after I read, I saw that it was not only a good book, but I was extremely touched and had a connection to the book. I felt her pain, her joy, and her shame. I felt like I was reliving Young Ju's childhood. Born into a traditional Korean family and going to a school full of new and unfamiliar faces, I felt like an outcast. It led to a time in my life when I was ashamed of my family and my Korean culture. I fought between being Korean or American. It wasn't until later that I realized I was a Korean American.
The House on Mango Street is similar to A Step from Heaven because they both tell about two young immigrants who struggle through similar issues, such as, poverty, acceptance, making new friends, and choosing between two different cultures. Through their experiences, they are able to find their identity, and shapes who they become when they are older. Both acceptance and prejudice are major themes in these two books, where they must struggle between two cultures. Both authors similarly use vignettes to tell the story and a great amount of imagery to help us visualize, understand, and allow us to feel what Young Ju and Esperanza was feeling. A Step from Heaven is a fast, easy-read that keeps you alert. I think it is a greatly written, memorable book that I would definitely recommend to others.

I am a pre-service teaching student majoring in Secondary Education (English & History). I first noticed the title of this book while reading one of the chapters in Essentials of Young Adult Literature and thought that a book about immigrating to America from Korea could be interesting. I immediately I hoped that I could find a way to use it as part of the required reading during this class (particularly since pleasure-reading is more or less a luxury at this time in my life). When I started reading through the lists of books that we could use for realistic fiction I was disappointed because time and time again, I did not see this novel - but it was there. It continued to call to me and I finally managed to find it.

This novel is a series of vignettes following the life of Young Ju from a period that is just prior to her move to Mi Gook (the US) at the age of four and continuing until she is about to leave home for college. The storyline encapsulates the many aspects of family dynamics but also provides the reader with accurate depictions of going to the INS (now USCIS) to renew a green card to interactions between members of her church congregation to Young Ju's experiences of hearing English for the first time.

There are so many things that make this novel unique that it is hard to capture them all. The first thing I noticed was a lack of quotation marks when various characters of the novel were speaking to one another. I was confused because I could not figure out why this convention had been implemented. I wondered if the Korean language lacked quotation marks, if the printer had chosen not to use them, if the author was making some sort of statement, or if it was some bizarre print error. Amazingly, those very marks popped up later in the novel (and I didn't even notice them at first). I soon realized the answer: quotation marks were only used when English was spoken which leads me to believe they are not used in Korean writing. The author's use of Korean words throughout the text without providing the definitions of those words really intrigued me. This required me, as a reader, to learn them through repetitive use by the author - just as Young Ju would have learned English. This convention further immersed me into the world of Young Ju and her family members. An Na has an amazing ability to capture Young Ju's unique vision of the world as a child who is encountering new things for the first time (a fat ball of snowy paper stuck on the wall = toilet paper). Even more impressive is the maturation of Young Ju's voice from a four year old through her teenage years.

It is quite easy to see why An Na won the Printz Award for her first novel.

A young adult autobiographical novel of one family's late-20th-century emigration to America, living in poverty. Told in prose so abbreviated as to be annoying, first person, present tense, with odd transliterations. Some find this language treatment intriguing, revealing, mirroring and poetic, but I found it contrived, overly clever and precocious. Na's perceptions and details are vivid, but added few deep personal insights into the familiar story of divided culture and backbreaking work by parents, who are mean, demanding and unforgiving of change. However, I'm an adult reader, jaded by extensive reading of Asian American writings, and young adults may find this book revelatory.

Ok - it's Shakespeare: points awarded. But I found myself loving the word play immensely. I was scratching notes in the columns - started my own word count when I found patterns... and then (as this was read for school) went head-first into the analytical essay to be written. Oddly - the instructor now has us working on a research paper which asks, "Did Shakespeare write Shakespeare?"
And a NOTE: I always wait to read any prologues or introductions AFTER I've read a text. I don't want the "authoritative voice" in the intro influencing my take on the book. But I do read them AFTER. This intro by Russell Fraser has to be the most inane blather I've found yet. It directly cops lines out of the play. And Fraser just makes himself giddy by musically rearranging words and paragraphs to no particular point - it is the sound of ones insides turning themselves out. As Goneril put it - "Good sir, to th' purpose."

If you have already carefully read the play, and seen various presentations, this ancient BBC radio recording may prove an adequate and refreshing version. There are jarring interludes of Stravinsky-inspired music which may now seem anachronistic or otherwise out of place, rather than tragically atmospheric, but you may find as well redeeming qualities within this recording.

For one we do not find the monotone reedy Guiness voice familiar from his films, but a broad spectrumed and robust rendition of the mighty (and tragic) character of Lear. I find nevertheless the voicings of the Fool unfortunately most often nearly indistinguishable from the young gentlemen, and the voicings of the royal women barely distinguishable one from the other, even Cordelia. Although this may seem a prerequisite for any radio presentation in which only aural cues are possible, anyone reading along, for instance in the venerable and traditional and reliable King Lear (Arden Shakespeare) edition, or intimately familiar with this ancient fable may be able to distinguish well who speaks when. Otherwise it can grow incomprehensibly, dismayingly, even discouragingly confusing.

Thus you may find here an adequate aural presentation of this play. You may also wish to hear the great Paul Scofield as King Lear (Naxos AudioBooks). Audio recordings by Gielgud, etc. are also available, but this serves as a good place to start and not too greatly eviscerated, even if our eyes are plucked out and we must hear only, nosing our way to Dover. Certainly an excellent tragedy to revisit as we find a mad old man approaching the throne and a woman in the waiting.

This paperback is a handy edition of Shakespeare's great play, useful for students on all levels. The critical essays in the back are helpful, though one or two more recent ones could have been included.

The only thing which mars this otherwise excellent Bantam Doubleday Dell Audio Publishing Renaissance Theatre Company King Lear with Sir John Gielgud (in around 1993), Dame Judith (formerly Judi) Dench, Bob Hoskins, Kenneth Brannagh, DEREK JACOBI, etc. is that following the academic fashion of that moment, it is First Folio only.

It is NOT abridged as indicated on the amazon product page. It is First Folio only. Otherwise it is overwhelming and excellent and demanding of repeated listenings.

For this reason alone the best recording we have available is the Caedmon recording King Lear in the Quarto or conflated version with the earlier Paul Scofield. Notice this is not the later Naxos Scofield recording King Lear (Naxos AudioBooks), which is most lamentably like this Gielgud, First Folio only.

The producers of these late recordings by Scofield and Gielgud wasted their final talent and experience doing a then currently academically correct First Folio-only recording. In the 36 page booklet which accompanies this Gielgud recording, the long experienced Fool, Michael Williams mentions politely that his best lines are cut. THe first brotherly banter between Edmund and Edgar (with the greatest joke in Shakespeare: "Since when are you a sectary astronomical?" Edgar's only joke) is lost, severely marring the play, as well as the enacting of a trial for the sisters in the straw hut: "I mistook you for a joint stool!" The Fool's best line: cut!

Basically the brochure enclosed reports no more than the fact this is First Folio only, and pages of bios of the actors and director with reflections on their performance. Cornwall at the time of this recording was presenting the part of Lear and wonders at Gielgud saying HIS lines. Also in the brochure are some overwrought black and white photos of earnest looking actors, and a few refreshing comments by Bob Hoskins and the Fool. Derek Jacobi has no comment.

I got two copies of this recording when I discovered my first purchase had no brochure. This head-shot brochure is not necessary for appreciation of the recording, but now I happily have a copy for the home and for the truck, without danger of the precautioned and unwanted FBI interference for illegal copying. May God bless amazon.com!

What a cast! Derek Jacobi (he of I, Claudius, of the saintly medical Brother Cadfael: Monk's Hook, The Leper of St. Giles, The Sanctuary Sparrow, One Corpse Too Many and of the mobster Duke in Mr. Alex Cox's Revengers Tragedy) presents an interesting if brief King of France, for once with a French accent which nevertheless occasionally slips into a Bela Lugosi imitation.

Bob Hoskins, best known here only for Who Framed Roger Rabbit, presents an interestingly husky Oswald, normally played as a weak courtier, here with a fresh take altogether, very effectively. It is worth hearing him, if only for his native cockney, but moreso for his excellent presentation of the otherwise despicable Oswald.

Dame Judith Dench is strong of course as Goneril, and strives to flesh out her evil role, as she describes in