Bryant Books

This was an admirable attempt. Some interesting information is in this book ... but how much can be written about The Man?

Once again, Scott Stout shows his intelligence. Probably another book he hasn't read. Folks are growing tired of your negative reviews. (SS, WMD)

I didn't buy this book, I just looked at a few pages available using the Amazon 'Search Inside' capability. The first page of the first chapter, Pink Ford, had two factual errors. It called the pink Ford a 1955 model (It was a 1956) and said it had a V6 engine (it had a straight six). If someone is interested in historical accuracy, it might be better to look for another book.

this book was really good! Well rounded text. Great format (although small print). Nearly 350 pages. I would highly recommend to Women's Studies, Black Studies, Queer Theory, English majors (studying African American lit).

For decades, African-American studies scholars have left issues facing non-heterosexuals to the side. For years, "queer" scholars have left concerns of people of color to the side. This anthology tries to address that void. It goes a long way in proving that black, gay academics can be just a rigorous and hardcore as white gay ones or straight black ones. The anthology has representative numbers of men and women. In some ways, it's a Who's Who of Black Gay Academia, including works from Cathy Cohen, Dwight McBride, and Jewelle Gomez.

Still, there is much about this book that frustrated me. A few years ago, a study was done of black LGBTs and most respondents said they hated the term "queer," yet the academics here champion it. Really, if "queer" is supposed to represent the four groups equally, then this book was quite lacking in its coverage of bisexuals and the transgendered. This is surprising given famous black bisexual writers such as Alice Walker, Stuart Hall, and June Jordan. Often "people of color" is used when only blacks are brought up; Latinos, Asians, and Native Americans barely come up in this book at all.

James Baldwin is brought up often here. I understand that. His writings were rigorous and often dealt with racial and sexual issues simultaneously. Still, I kept thinking about how bell hooks once wrote that Toni Morrison gets a lot of attention when publishers won't print the works of black women that are equally as sophisticated. James Baldwin deserves his crown in black, gay letters, but I'm concerned about him being the only one to get to wear a crown. Several books have been printed about the many non-hetero members of the Harlem Renaissance, yet that group hardly comes up here. James is getting a bit played out and the authors here are not helping change that tendency.

Finally, I had beef with many of the essays. Charles Nero has great points but his essay is really two works glued together. Can anyone really say the whiteness of New Orleans' "gay ghetto" is due to "Chasing Amy" or "Six Feet Under"? One author could have written quickly about how he supported a gay, feminine student when that student was condemned by a masculine, heterosexual one. Instead, he went on and on in unnecessary jargon and babble. Kara Keeling's essay was 90% theory and 10% a discussion of Dunye's "Watermelon Woman." Why bother to bring up the film if you're barely going to discuss it?

I wasn't really feelin' this text, but that's not to say it didn't have great aims.

Forget the other review here by the Politically Correct flunkie. "Racist"! is one of the favorite chants employed by the nitwits of today to describe historic FACTS which don't fit into their twisted and bizarre view of what the past was really like.

This book reveals the many factors and elements leading up to, and the igniting of, the terrible massacre of Whites on the Minnesota frontier by the teeming masses of the Sioux. Its well worth reading and its one of those books that really bites. There's no sniveling excuse-making and no side-stepping that's done within the pages of this work as there is in so many other books about frontier history which are available these days.

Another great aspect of this book's content is that it thoroughly backs up the character assessment made of the Sioux Indians by early explorers and traders, as well as members of other Indian tribes. It so happens that the Sioux once resided in the forests of central Canada. In fact, they took part in the French & Indian War, and fought on the side of the British. Sitting Bull even had a number of medals which were given to some of his relatives by representatives of King George. This is important to note because of all the hogwash rubbish-in-print out there concerning the terrible time Whites gave the Sioux while they were out on the plains.
You see, the Sioux Indians were chased out of the forests of central Canada by other tribes who obtained fire arms befor the Sioux did during the fur trade, and once on the plains the hordes of Sioux began a relentless expansionist/imperialistic/colonial series of wars against other tribes ( Kiowa, Ponca, Oto, Osage, Kansa, Omaha, Cheyenne, Plains Cree, Arikara, Pawnee, Absaroke-Crow, and Mandan...by the way, the reason you don't hear much about many of these tribes in terms of how they faired during the settlement of the West is due to their being destroyed by the Sioux before settlement began!! ). The Sioux destroyed and/or displaced all but two of these other tribes, gaining control of their prime hunting territories and sending survivers of bloody wars fleeing southward ( note that the Sioux never established any reservations for the Indian tribes they displaced!!!).
Two of the tribes ( Pawnee and Crow ) were comprised of superb warriors - far superior to the Sioux - and they absolutely refused to budge to the relentless Sioux onslaughts in spite of being severely outnumbered. Even though the Sioux launched a constant campaign of total GENOCIDE against these two tribes of Indians, the Pawnee and Crow were able to keep fighting off Sioux assaults until Whites began arriving on the plains and they could become allies with White forces against the overwhelming tribes of ever-hostile and butchering Sioux.
So how does this information tie into the content of this book? Well, it certainly shoots to pieces the arguements of Politically Correct clowns who try to pass off Sioux atrocities as merely being the result of a victim's frustration over being abused. In other words, it is a rock-solid FACT that the Sioux weren't "innocent victims" by any stretch of the imagination at any time in their tribal history. They ruthlessly massacred other Indians and later did the same to the White settlers who came in contact with them because that was the routine way these Indians had for behaving toward anyone who was not a Sioux. The massacre in Minnesota resulted from the Sioux following their usual aggressive and blood thirsty routine behavior pattern - this time against White settlers rather than the members of other Indian tribes.

If you read this book and then examine details contained within the tribal histories of other Indians who suffered due to coming into contact with the Sioux, you'll see how really absurd and insane the view which holds the Sioux up as being "victims" really is. In other words, "Dances With Wolves" has no connection to reality whatsoever and "Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee" is not a "history book", its merely a story book! Cranks like Vine Deloria Jr. with their whining and complaining about White civilization have nothing valid to say and can be filed away as kooks.

Books like this one do an excellent job in dispelling the disgusting Politically Correct fantasy-as-fact goo which has been used to conceal the true facts of North America's frontier history. Get this one. Its well worth reading!

This edition of "Indian Massacre in Minnesota" is a reprint of an 1864 history on the Dakota uprising in southeastern Minnesota in 1862. Charles Bryant, the primary author, played a role in the uprising; he was a soldier at Fort Ridgley during the assaults launched on the fort by Little Crow and his Dakota followers. Bryant later served as a prosecutor with the Sioux Commission, seeking restitution from confiscated Indian annuity funds to help white victims of the uprising. The full title of the book is, "A History of the Great Massacre by the Sioux Indians In Minnesota Including the Personal Narratives of Many who Escaped." You have to love those 19th century titles!

The book contains three sections. The first section outlines the various causes for the outbreak on the reservation followed by accounts of early battles and incidents. Bryant and Murch provide several cogent reasons for the troubles, including Indian starvation, a late annuity payment (which, in what is one of the great ironies of history, arrived at Fort Ridgely on the day of the uprising), and tensions between Indians who accepted white civilization programs (farmer Indians) and reactionaries who wished to remain true to Dakota ways (blanket Indians). These causes still find supporters in modern historical examinations.

Not content with exposing obvious causes of Dakota rebellion, Bryant and Murch reveal the presence of a racial conspiracy on the part of the Dakota. According to Bryant and Murch, Little Crow and the other leaders of the rebellion conspired to attack white settlers because that is what all lesser races do when confronted by the superior cultural influence of the white race. With what one assumes is a straight face, Bryant and Murch conclude that Indians are savage, indolent, rude little children incapable of any true ability to retain Christian values or civilizing practices administered by whites. Was the uprising really a conspiracy? Yes it was, in the sense that Indian leaders met in secret to decide their options. Even then, it was hardly monolithic; many Indians argued against war with the whites because they knew they would lose in the long run. Even Little Crow, the leader vilified by Bryant and Murch as the scourge of God, initially argued AGAINST fighting the whites. To label the 1862 uprising as a RACIAL conspiracy is ridiculous because Indians rarely looked at anything in a racial manner. In the early days of contact with Europeans, Dakotas always accepted whites who married their daughters as members of the family. The literature of the time is rife with references to "our white brothers and sisters," making a racial conspiracy highly suspect as a viable methodology for examining Indian/White relations.

Closely tied with this conspiracy theory is the conception of Christianity and God. Bryant and Murch see the spread of white civilization as a divinely sanctioned mission to go forth and subdue the land. Since Indians do not do anything with land (except live off of it, but we'll ignore that pesky little fact in the interests of examining the claims of the authors), it is up to whites to develop the land while showing the natives the right way to live. This worldview finds expression through a document recording the words of one Major Thomas Galbraith. Who is Galbraith? He is the government agent in charge of the affairs of the Dakota reservation!

The second section of the book is a lengthy series of narrative accounts from white settlers involved in the uprising. These are truly heartrending accounts of murder, torture, and other hazardous conditions faced by those who survived the rebellion. Two things become apparent in this section. First, pioneer folk were hardy, industrious people. The Indians were not going to keep these people down for long. Most of the accounts are from women, discussing the deaths of their husbands and children, wandering around in the wilderness for weeks on end with little food and water, or carrying children for miles upon miles in rough weather and difficult terrain. These narratives show that tragedy descended on both Dakotas and settlers during the uprising.

Second, there is a total blackout on Indian or pro-Indian narratives about the conflict. A noticeably absent narrative is that of Sarah Wakefield, the white wife of an agency physician captured by Indians early in the conflict. This absence is probably due to Sarah's defense of Chaska, the Indian who protected Sarah during her captivity. After the war ended, Sarah fought tooth and nail to clear Chaska of any harmful accusations. She made such a nuisance of herself that whites began to darkly insinuate that she must be a "squaw," and therefore someone who secretly supported the Indian agenda. As for Chaska, he ended up going to the gallows.

The final section discusses the end of the uprising, the trials and executions of Indians, and the campaigns of Generals Sibley and Sulley against the fleeing Dakotas. In ominously prescient words, Bryant and Murch discuss the need for total war against the outcast Dakotas and their Lakota relatives in the west.

Although the book contains glaring racism, shallow descriptions of many events (because it appeared while the repercussions of the uprising were still going on), and outright malarkey, there is still some value in reading this book. Information on the causes of the conflict is good, and many of the documents included in the narrative provided sharp insight into the people involved in the war. Any serious examination of the Dakota uprising of 1862 must take this book into account.

What seems at first to be a collection of amusing stories, upon further inspection, proceeds to question prejudice and judgement by means of a very subtle humor. John Bryant covers an amazing scope of concepts in this book leaving the reader enlightened, smirking, and very very thoughtful.

This book is made out of snippets and appears rather cool on the first look. Compared to authors like Dave Barry, however, Bryant's observations are not as much a belly laugh after all, but leave a weird after taste. A book to read and then give away.

The years have been flying by for most people, but not so fast that the theme of boys and war will ever be separated from the novel A SEPARATE PEACE by John Knowles, who attended Phillips Exeter Academy in 1942 to 1944. The Twayne's Masterworks Studies book on the novel by Hallman Bell Bryant, subtitled THE WAR WITHIN, which appeared in 1990, easily identified the theme of the book as the special expectations of boys in time of war. 7,445,000 copies of the Dell-Bantam paperback were in print when this study of the novel appeared. The incidents in the novel retain their significance for many readers because the setting in World War II, with its expectation that students would go on to play some part in the great historical drama that was being played out on a world stage, already seemed strangely out of place when A SEPARATE PEACE was published in 1959.

There is an index for Hallman Bell Bryant's book on pages 126-129, mostly containing names but also mentioning "onomastics, 112-13" for the book's analysis of the names of the major characters in the novel, Gene Forrester and Finny, the fallen angel Phineas. Gore Vidal appears in the index because:

Brinker Hadley, a minor character who is the typical "big man on campus" type, was based on another classmate of Knowles's, Gore Vidal, who, Knowles recalled, was an "unusual and thriving" person as a schoolboy, although he did not know him very well. (p. 32).

Thirteen of the novel's characters are listed in the index under "minor characters in A SEPARATE PEACE." I was most interested in Elwin Lepellier, who is called Leper throughout the book, and who is on more pages than the thirteen pages given for him in the index. One of my favorite points in A SEPARATE PEACE is when Phineas said:

"And you told me about Leper, that he's gone crazy. That's the word, we might as well admit it. Leper's gone crazy. When I heard that about Leper, then I knew that the war was real, this war and all the wars. If a war can drive somebody crazy, then it's real all right."

Hallman Bell Bryant understands the nature of the game that Phineas and Gene have been playing, a `binge' of the imagination "as cohorts who lived through an intoxicating experience" (p. 99), but he might fall short of Leper's ability in the book to describe his new state of mind:

"I'm no fool, you know. I'm not going to tell you everything and then have it used against me later. You always did take me for a fool, didn't you? But I'm no fool any more. I know when I have information that might be dangerous." He was working himself up to indignation. "Why should I tell you! Just because it happens to suit you!"
"Leper," Brinker pleaded, "Leper, this is very important--"
"So am I," he replied thinly, "I'm important. You've never realized it, but I'm important too. You be the fool," he gazed shrewdly at Brinker, "you do whatever anyone wants whenever they want it. You be the fool now. Bastard."

Not nearly as successful as A SEPARATE PEACE, the novel PEACE BREAKS OUT by John Knowles was published in 1981 and is very briefly summarized in Chapter 9, Final Reflections, of this book. "The nation, having defeated all external enemies, now moves to eliminate all internal foes, real or imagined. Here the enemy is depicted as those who would corrupt the `Devon Spirit,' " (p. 116). Major characters include "A German sympathizer named Hochschwender is a blatant Nazi and racist, and his views make him the enemy of a boy named Wexford, a superpatriotic type who is intolerant of anyone with different views." (p. 117). Overly obvious is "the tendency to correlate outside historical forces and motivation of characters." (p. 118). I liked a certain toughness which the book exhibited as aftereffects of the militarization of society. Comparing it to UNFASHIONABLE OBSERVATIONS, dramatically it is similar to Nietzsche's complaints about the victorious boasts of Germans after their victory over France in the war of 1870. In a sense, war was over, but the mentality could be as deadly as ever for those inclined to dwell on what it all meant.

There are great comic moments in A SEPARATE PEACE which are not totally captured by Hallman Bell Bryant, but his analysis comes very close to showing how great literature comes about. A Hollywood movie version of `A SEPARATE PEACE' from 1972 appears in this book where a change of the setting for key scenes made the action visually more dramatic:

"Instead of having Gene kick Leper out of his chair, he has Gene deliver a vicious blow to Leper's mouth outdoors in the snow where he falls to the ground and curls up in the fetal position, the red blood flowing from his mouth and making a stark contrast with the white snow. Rather than running away, as in the novel, Gene merely stands helplessly over his fallen friend as the camera pulls back, leaving them both diminished and helpless-looking in a setting of cold white bleakness." (p. 94).

"Thus, we never learn what Brinker is feeling ... Larry Peerce, the director, tried to make the atmosphere less horrible and more comic by staging a parade of boys dressed in black who stomped about singing an obscene song." (p. 100).

This could remind some people of basic training, memorizing witty marching ditties, more than the high academic atmosphere preferred by those who should be drawn to elite schooling with athletic games as recreational activities, but the fake parade sounds dramatic enough for the Hollywood version of the novel.

A Separate Peace was difficult for me to understand because it takes a path deep in to a teenager's mind. You see the pains, successes, and problems of the main character's life.

The illustations and directions for doing individual exercises across a variety of different kinds of equipment are excellent, as is the discussion of the pros and cons of the alternatives. However information targeted for the development of strength training programs is elementary and not enough is provided for you to make intelligent variations on the sample programs. So, for example, what is the objective of a strength training program: Should you try to include exercise which tap all the muscles illustrated (in their excellent diagram)? If the goal is to simply include those used in daily living, what are they exactly? Is anything gained by exercising a given muscle in multiple exercises? What is the philosphy behind the selection of exercises in the sample programs? What accounts for the differences between workouts organized by equipment type (eg free weights vs machines) and those organized by program style (eg single vs multiple sets)? In addition, and frustrating for a training novice, there are a number of cross-referencing failures and inconsistencies in vocabulary: for example, are leg and hip adduction and abduction the same thing? How do 'hamstrings' map to the muscles named in the anatomical illustration? It would also have been useful to have a table relating the exercises to the muscles exercised to help the reader think more clearly about how to put an exercise program together.

This guide will help you design your own program to fit your needs and wants. Well illustrated with photos, it's also clearly written. The book gives descriptions of free-weight work-outs along with multi-station and Nautilus-type machines, and even has a section on working with a partner. Complete and easy to read, it's perfect for me, a person who likes to work out but isn't an athlete. A chart of major muscle groups and corresponding exercises also helps define what's going on in your body. My only complaint: the human body illustration used to identify muscles is clearly a *guy*, which, though it doesn't take away from the book's effectiveness, seems a bit silly.

If you are looking for an academic treatise on nice houses of this time and place, or want to get a little history on specific houses in the area, I suspect this is a marvelous book. The basic pattern is one or two exterior pictures, often somewhat small, and a couple of pages of text, for each of a hundred lovely old getaway homes for the wealthy of the time. I buy a lot of books in the general vein of beautiful old homes/camps/cottages/cabins in beautiful recreational areas such as Maine and other Coastal New England and like most of them. This one just wasn't good fodder for the fantasy of what it would be to own one of these houses. There were only a handful of interior photos in the whole book, and many/most of the exterior photos are small black and whites from old magazines from the area. I appreciate being educated a little while I dream, but this one was order's of magnitudes too dry for me.

This book is a well researched and, to my personal knowledge, an accurate historical account of these houses. The description of the house that my great grandfather had built for our family was biographically accurate and architectually detailed. Beautifully illustrated. Having personal details of the lives of the people who built these houses adds depth and interest. A wonderful reading experience for people with N.H. roots and interest in turn of the century architecture.

This book is not a serious book, though it is fun for when you are boerd. All in all, this book is not worth the price. It is predictable with no solid plot.

This is a great book. I'd probably do the same thing if my own school went ballistic like that. Tori did the right thing standing up like that. It was incredible! I give two thumbs up.

IF I ever had to be on trial, Nancy Grace is the one I'd like in my corner! As I write this, she's already gotten married and given birth to her 2 children and if anyone deserves happiness,it's her. May God bless you and your new family! I'm proud to say you are from my home state and home town-I'm from Macon also.

Yes, Nancy Grace is loud and over-opinionated (that's what I love about her!) But she is also very passionate and thought-provoking. As a faithful viewer of her TV show, I decided to pick up this book to learn a little more about her. The book is a lot like I expected it to be. Nancy does not mince words and is never a shrinking violet. She is for the victims, totally. Personally, I do not share a lot of her politics, however I have always been the type of person who can celebrate the differences in others. Nancy is an accomplished journalist, not to mention attorney. If you have any interest in the legal system and want to know how to be proactive (not reactive) than this book is for you.

I can't wait for Nancy to come back to her show, she is much missed! My only complaint about her show is that miserable witch, Susan Moss; going by the bogus title as "family law advocate." This woman trolls many tabloid cable news shows (and is on Nancy's show just about every night) but never has anything productive to add because she is always in a hysterical rage. This woman acts extremely vengeful. Back in Sept. when O.J. was arrested in Las Vegas Susan Moss made a very ugly and ignorant comment that is harmful and offensive to all Americans, especially Black-Americans. Susan Moss said, "the Juice deserves the noose." (Not that it should matter,) I am no fan of O.J., but this was a blatantly bigoted comment that flew over everyone's heads. I'm surprised Al Sharpton didn't say anything to Susan Moss? Incidentally, Headline News' (the cable channel that produces Nancy's nightly talk show) parent-company CNN, produced a documentary about the relevance and racist undercurrents of nooses among African-Americans. And, this past year the issues of nooses was a very hot issue that was brought to the forefront when the MSM reported that multiple African-American people were threatened in this cowardice manner. So, I am astonished that no one said "boo" to Susan Moss about her disgusting comment. Why is Susan Moss allowed to get away with this blatant act of bigoted hate-speech on coast-to-coast American TV...? As far as I'm concerned this is just poison. And, why didn't Nancy call her on it yet? And, why didn't anyone else call her on it...? By saying nothing, society is condoning this act of hate and conveying that this type of behavior is acceptable.

Nancy Grace takes on our liberal, soft on crime, pro criminal, anti victim justice system and she takes them on hard and she is holding nothing back! If you are a Nancy Grace fan you will love this book! Nancy Grace at her BEST!

This is one amazing woman. The story about how she became a lawyer is nothing short of awe inspiring. And the stories in the court room will make you cringe and maybe even cry. And then there's the stories of the high profile celebrities who walked after they murdered. Very disconcerting and nauseous.

Pandering.

Easy read though. As she implicitly acknowledges in every chapter of this book, she's a prime example of what she's criticizing.

She also appears to be intellectually dishonest and does not respect the legal system. Her tirades (and "tirades" is fairly accurate) against high priced defense attorneys (easy target, everybody hates them, right? me too) are quite simplistic for what I'd expect from a former prosecutor.

I can't believe that a person who comes across as a fairly average thinker, and a zealot, somehow managed to achieve a 100% conviction rate, without bending the rules a LOT.

Still, not a bad read. Burned through it very fast.

I would have given it 2 stars, until I found out there were sections in the book plagiarized. An former officer of the court who steals intellectual property, that deserves a ZERO.

This book does not cover the material you will be tested on in exam #70-176. It is a clean miss. If I hadn't signed up for the MeasureUp practice test, I would have flunked solidly.

There are points in the book where the correct subjects are covered. But where you need syntax, the book only provides high level verbage. Where you need theory, the book provides syntax. This is true of so much of the book that I feel it fair to say that reading it may have only garnered me two questions on the exam.

I just pass the 70-176 exam and this book was the last thing that I read. It helped me enter the atmosfere of the exam but I didn't find any of the questions from the book in the real test. The book is very concise and cover more than the Mastering VB6 from Microsoft. It is not a book for learning becouse it contains almost only questions (and answers).

This book is a good review of what to expect on the test. Do not use it as your only means of studying for the exam or as a means of learning Visual Basic 6. If you are looking for a concise book for the final cram session before your test, use this book.

Being an MCT and doing visual basic programming for six years, I was really disappointed in this book. The questions did not relate to the test very well, and it appeared to me that most of the questions were from the old vb5 test. This book should concentrate on test points more than an explaination of visual basic. People buy these books to brush up on test questions not learn vb. If you want a test aid skip this book and hit the transender tests.

I'm not an expert at VB, but I have good experience and this book was useful but not enough to get me through the test. Use this book only as a guide as to what to study in detail if you want to pass.