Burke Books

A unique book. Changes the way one thinks about geometry. The concepts and tools become second nature. I strongly recommend it for engineers who need differential geometry in their research (they do, whether they know it or not).

To give an example from page 134: "Vector fields that do not commute are called anholonomic. If two transformations commute, then the system would never leave a 2-surface. This obvious results is called the Frobenius Theorem."

Now after reading about the Frobenius Theorem elsewhere, few people would call in "obvious." Nonetheless, when you read Burke, you will agree. (Granted, it will not happen at first reading unless you are already familiar with the material. So you will read the book several times, which only adds to the pleasure.) Afterwards, you will be happy to consult the proof elsewhere.

Caveat: this book is not the place to go for a formal presentation. It may cause conniptions in the more ideological bourbakistes. Nothing should prevent one from also reading some of the excellent texts that present the material in a precise way, for instance those by Manfredo Perdigão do Carmo, Spivak, or Lang. Nonetheless, Burke is the one to go for the intuition.

The previous review is amazingly perceptive into Bill Burke's personality and thinking. He was not the most discplined writer or lecturer, (I had no less than 4 courses from him) but his insight and intuition could be amazing. I would recommend this book as a companion to something more traditional. If you are interested in General Relativity, which is what the book was suppose to be a precursor for, get Schutz or Misner, Thorne and Wheeler, or Wald.

Also, if you do want this book, get the errata from Burke's webpage,...is quite helpful.

I would also hearitly recommend Burke's best book: Geometry, Spacetime and Cosmology which is out of print. It is much physical and the examples are clearer. He taught english majors and theater students general relativity with that book.

I'm not a physicist or mathematician but I play one on TV. So I am more qualified to review a book on differntial geometry than either of the above professionals. This book is a very good introduction to all the hairy squibbles that theoretical physicists are writing down these days. In particular if you are perplexed by the grand unification gang then this book will help you understand the jargon. However, having only had physics when advanced vector calculus was enough to get by, it is a bit hard going due to the frequent errors and glosses the author makes. Burke gives a very hip and entertaining introduction to some of the most beautiful ideas in physics. It is enjoyable to read if you like sinking your teeth into something more rewarding than Ann Rice. I gave it a six rating because the errors and glosses are so annoying. I suspect Burke's puckishness is responsible; the book has no actual problem sets but he does work out problems that don't always work out. So the reader really has to work at understanding by correcting the possibly(?) intentional errors. Very sly of him. I am on my second reading and suspect that several readings down the line I will probably get the message. The book deserves loving attention.

***from David Burke, author of the "old" Biz Talk series***

Thank you all very much for your interest in my products! Please note that "Biz Talk 1" is now out of print, but I now have a NEW updated version called "The Slangman Guide to BIZ SPEAK 1," published by SLANGMAN PUBLISHING. Please do an amazon.com search for it and you'll be able to search through the entire book!

Happy reading!

"Slangman" David Burke

As a teacher of English as a foreign language at a private business college in Shanghai, China, I have found the Biz Talk series to be very useful. After one day of using it, students usually ask for more and want to know how they can buy the other volumes in the series.

I personally am not so enamored with Biz Talk-1. Sure, there is some useful slang inside, but the conversations presented are so chock-full of slang that they are not realistic. They also use some slang that is not commonly heard.

I'm not a big fan of the Western genre...just not something I ever got into.

however, I am a fan of the author, as he created my favorite character: Conan the Barbarian. So, I purchased this collection of short stories and loved them!!!

The men are based on stories that old timers who lived through the era told Mr. Howard back in his childhood through the 1930s, when he was a professional author.

The raw, rude writing style coupled with the action, gives these short stories memorable punch.

In this collection, many of Robert Howard's best westerns are presented for those who enjoy this great authors work. While in the same series is another collection of humorous westerns, those are, because of their lack of Howard's usually downbeat vision, inferior to these. The Vultures of Whapeton--the longest of the stories--is easily the finest, featuring intensely described gunfights, paranoia, and carefully interwoven, downbeat moral themes. Also, the ending is very powerful (though a somewhat lesser happy ending is also included). There are any number of other fine stories though, including crossovers such as The Man on the Ground, which effortlessly injects a sense of wonder and awe into what would otherwise be a traditional western revenge story. As with most of Howard's prodigious body of work, the writing is grim and crisply paced, making it not only quick but enjoyable. My sincerest hope is that some talented young director will read these stories and choose to adapt one into a worthwhile movie. Overall, this is one of the finest collections of Howard's work and is thoroughly recommended.

After reading dozens of R.Howard stories,from Kull to Breckinridge Elkins I was looking foward to this collection of dramatic westerns.For some reason they just didnt hold my interest.Unlike most of his other stories these seemed very dated.I realize they are seventy years old,but Howard's other writing seems to me to be as fresh as if it was written last week.There are a couple of good stories, "Law Shooters of Cowtown" and "Vultures of Wahpeton",but mostly its like the difference between watching a western like "Shane", and then watching "Hopalong Cassidy".I did like the three "spooky" westerns and I thought a poem "The Sandhills Crest", was excellent.If you are a Howard fan,like me, you might like this just to get a taste of his western work, but if your looking for exciting western action I would probably look elsewhere.

Peter Norton shows the way to Windows 2000 networking. I found this book easy to refer, understand the concepts and install. The fine tuning and upkeep of the server has been extensively shown.

Peter Norton is tradirionally a great "teacher". His use of everyday expressions to explain complex technological terms, his choice of illustrative examples and his selection of graphical illustrations make the book easy to understand. If you are like me, seeking to take an exam on the subject, then you will need other materials to supplement the areas that were not included in the book. The areas of Windows 2000 Server that were covered will be my only source of future reference.

I have normally associated Peter Norton with his computer disk utilities which have certainly saved my bacon a few times. O f late he has turned to producing high quality reference books

I was extremely impressed with this publication. Having read the companion book Windows 2000 Professional, this book follows on nicely. I guess it is not a book for beginners but it leads a lot of us lapsed network jockeys through detail we had messed with but not fully comprehended. There is a very good sections on IIS which is little understood by most and one on the Internet which everyone thinks they understand.This book gets to the heart of Internet networks, though not as comprehensively dealt with as in his Windows 2000 Professional, it concentrates on the server aspects. Security and management of the server are covered well.This is a must read for Administrators. In fact he and his co authors seems to cover everything very nicely with as much nitty gritty to make it a reference book to be held in the ready.

All in all this is a very good book for those familiar with networking but not so familiar with Windows 2000 Server. There is also enough detail for newbies to get a good understanding .

The price is very reasonable.

This is an absolutely brilliant book for people who are just beginning to get into tarot cards. It explains very little about the history of the tarot and things like that so for that you'll need to find another book but in terms of getting to know the different cards and different sets and also ways of laying the cards it is absolutely indispensable.

For each of the cards in the major arcana (the "picture" cards) cards are shown from four different sets and each is gone through meticulously in terms of symbols and how the meaning of the card is represented in the picture. Because it deals with four different cards it gives a very extensive understanding of what the card stands for and so it is a great help when you pick your own set and look for things in its pictures which communicate the meaning to you. For each of the cards in the minor arcana only one card is shown but you still get a really good idea of what each card means.

At the end of the book, eight different ways of laying up the cards are shown and explained through cases, which makes them very easily accessible.

All in all, cards from 12 of the most populars sets of cards are used and so you get a good idea of the diversity which can be found and how different cards suit different people.

All in all this really is a must for people who are beginning to look into tarot cards. I doubt if you'll find another book which is as extensive and easy to use as this one. Once you've gotten into it a bit it also works great as a place to look if you're in the middle of a reading and have just forgotten the meaning of a card or two.

"Understanding the Tarot" certainly lives up to its title. Previously, I had thought I would have to do a lot of memorizing, using the miniscule, ill-printed pamphlets that come with some decks. But here, clear, concise descriptions of each card using full color examples from 13 different decks, make the "understanding" come naturally. Various symbologies are touched upon as threads to aid comprehension. For example, the astrological relationships in suits and court cards will become obvious even before the third suit.

The basic interpretations of cards from the several decks include discussion of similarities and differences among them. This exposure also will help beginners find a deck that fulfills their expections. Sample readings in dialog format demonstrate five popular spreads in the final chapter on doing a reading.

This book has taken me from beginner level to merely inexperienced! I feel better able to digest the text-only material that I have collected and avoided until now.

After reading/using Juliet Sharman-Burke's "Understanding the Tarot," you may find, as I have, that the Tarot makes so much SENSE, you'll wonder what's so arcane about it, after all?

Although this book has good explainations of the cards and very vivid pictures from various decks it lacks a good explaination of tarot spreads. It demonstrates a tarot spread through the first person by walking you through someome's personal reading. This only gives one interpretation of the location of the card within the tarot spread. There is no discussion on how the locations of the card within the spread relate to each other.
This is a good book to provide example to a beginner but those seeking more in depth knowledge will find it lacking.

This is a very unusual book. Even before readers begin discussing the content of the book, they find themselves in vigorous debate over the intentions of its author. I am the third reviewer so far to post his thoughts on amazon. One believes that this book contains important political insights, the other derides him for attempting to make such a case. I decided to ignore these issues and read the book in order to understand what was being expressed. I found it very enjoyable.

Now, the title is a bit misleading. The author in no way truly "vindicates" natural society. The book consists more of a series of brilliant critiques of what the author calls "political" or "civil society" the purpose of which is to compare this arrangement to the state of nature, or "natural society."

The first 20 or so pages documents several wars which were carried out by political states for trivial purposes. In particular he discusses the military campaigns of Egypt, Greece, and Rome. The prose is very lucid and engaging. He uses phrases like "great Carnage", "Rage of Conquest" "...poured out Seas of Blood in their Formation and in their Destruction." These enlightening details culminate with the fascinating conclusion, "I charge the whole of these Effects on political Society. ... [T]hat Political Society is justly chargeable with much the greatest Part of this Destruction of the Species."

The next 20 or so pages discusses 3 political systems: despotisms (empires), aristocracy, and democracy. These three systems, the author concludes, differ but in name. All are clear historical examples of tyranny.

So this book is not so much a defense of the state of nature than it is a critique of government, or poltitical institutions generally. Only in a select few passages does the author mention the moral superiority of the "natural society." Overall, I found them largely unconvincing. For example, Burke argues that because there were no wants in the natural state, life was simpler, and thus happier.

Satire or not, I enjoyed this short little book. But you will not find a robust Rousseauian defense of the natural state in here. You will find, however, a clear and lucid argument against government. And it is because of this that I rated the book the way I did.

The redoubtable Edmund Burke is widely known as the man who layed down the philosophical foundations of modern conservatism. Thus, it may come as a great surprise to discover that he penned what may very well be one of the earliest clear expositions of philosophical anarchism in the Western tradition. While scholars may always dispute over the issue of whether or not the "Vindication" was meant as a serious work or a satire, the book's status as a landmark is incontestable.

In this terse tract, Burke sets out to apply the same rationalistic standards to the realm of politics that 18th century Deists like Lord Bolingbroke applied to the doctrines of revealed religion. As Deists upheld the distinction between natural( i.e. rational) and artificial (irrational or faith-based) religion, Burke seeks to defend natural (anarchistic or voluntaristic) society against that which is dominated by the brute engine of government.

Although modern conservatives may also give their full support to the idea that the unrestrained employment of reason undermines the basis of both religion and government, it is infidel anarchists who will derrive the greatest value from his insights. For those wise enough to allow the light of reason to be their guide, the "Vindication" serves as a powerful indictment of government and the innumerable crimes that it has perpetrated on mankind wherever it has existed.

If indeed the work is a satire, it would seem that it has done far more damage to Burke's cause than he would ever have imagined. Not only did the tract serve as a great inspiration to William Godwin, the man who, in less than four decades from the time of this book's publication, authored one of the definitivie works of philosophical anarchism, but it will certainly serve the ends of anarchists for many years to come, as they continue to wage war against the religion of politics with many of the same weapons that Burke has so eloquently furnished for us.

I was a little startled by an earlier review of this work that suggested that Burke's parody of Bolingbroke could possibly be taken seriously as a work of political insight. And although there have been scholars who have suggested (without supporting evidence) that Burke meant the work to be taken seriously, it is difficult for anyone familiar with Burke's later writings to regard "Vindication" as anything other than a rather dismal parady. The later writings all display qualities sadly lacking in this work, especially the subtlety of thought and nuanced insights featured in "The Reflections on the French Revolution." Anyone who could take this work seriously merely displays a kind of political obtuseness that goes against the very sophistacated, practice-rooted political thinking exemplified by Burke. It is rather laughable that a radical thinker like Godwin should have mined Burke's parody for insights. It demonstrates all to well the essential shallowness of radical political thought.

Burke is America's answer to French postmodernism. In some ways, he is superior, but he is not as fun -- he's not just jibber-jabbering, though, and he isn't self-righteous. When he makes a point, too, it sticks. It's weird he's never been translated into French.

In "Attitudes Towards History," Kenneth Burke moves from literary criticism to social theory and the philosophy of history. His subject is how communities are formed and reformed around attitudes of acceptance and rejection, attitudes that Burke sees as symbolized in the literary genres such as tragedy, comedy, satire and fantasy. Part I, "Acceptance and Rejection" develops acceptance, passivity and rejection in terms of the work of William James, Whitman and Emerson before developing the Poetic Categories he finds in literary genres and the Destiny of Acceptance Frames. Part II, "The Curve of History," breaks the past into periods of Christian Evangelism, Mediaveal Synthesis, Protestant Transition, Naive Capitalism, and Emergent Collectivisim, with a final chapter devoted to Comic Correctives. Part III, "Analysis of Symbolic Structure," looks at the General Nature of Ritual and them provides a Dictionary of Pivotal Terms such as Efficiency, Identification, Perspective by Incongruity, etc., which shows how language is saturated with evaluative ideas, images and biases. This volume also offers a substantial new afterword by Burke that looks back at his work in this volume and its companion, "Permanence and Change." It is the latter that stands out as the most important work in this first "trilogy" by Burke, which lays the foundation for our understanding of the relationship between rhetoric and social theory.

It was short, it contained good character building, it had an uninteresting plot.

Not as good as I'd hoped, but you should read it anyway because of the insight on the character of Kathryn Janeway, wich repairs some of the damage caused by not-so-good plotting, short lenght and uninteresting side-characters.

Kathryn Janeway has always been a complicated personality. The Starfleet Academy novels reflect that nicely. I'm 27 years old and got a kick out of all three!

This book was the first of its kind and caused uproar within the British police ranks when it was first published in 1993. Based on the author's PhD research with anonymous officers, the book contains both a semi-academic introduction to each issue but consists mostly of edited interviews with gay and lesbian police officers that are easy and interesting reading. The combination of Burke's socio-psychological observations along with the spoken word, make this book compelling and it remains a must read for all police officers and anyone else who still mis-understands what it really means to be gay.

Marc E Burke was an officer in the British police force from 1982- 1986 and his book is a collection of transcribed interviews from currently serving and retired British police officers, bracketted by Burke's psychological analysis and commentary on the issues raised. Burke says he prepared the book for a cross section of readers. The general public to raise awareness of police "culture", the force to highlight the experiences of gay police, and the gay community to show the commitment most gay police have to working with them. The biggest discovery in the book is the notion of gay police living in a "no-man's land" whereby they don't connect with either their workmates because they are gay, or the community because they are police, and thereby bear the contempt of both. The book makes the issue of coming out in the force a major trauma and how a number of officers have resigned because of it. The force is perceived to be an ultra-conservative body and there are as many cases of officers showing their support for an "out" copper as there are of harassment by homophobic police. In the chapter "Casualties" there is the story of a former Irish officer hounded for years because he was seen living with his male lover, who was eventually dishonorourably discharged. The horror of this experience is expressed in 13 rivetting pages of beautifully written prose. All the interviews in the book are surprisingly good- easy to read and often funny and enlightening. What is not good is Burke's tedious commentaries, since he points out what is obvious from the interviews and his academic approach is often inaccessible. Burke's commentary is presented in plain text while the interviews are in italic, so perhaps my preference is influenced by what my eyes go to more easily. An annoying note is that each interview gives the officers rank but unless you have a prior knowledge of these acronyms or can memorise the list at the end of the book, you'll be flicking back and forth to find out what all those letters mean, or not bother as I soon learnt to do. A few things gave me a giggle. The San Francisco Golden State Police Officer's Association (GSPOA) used to be known as Pigs in Paradise (PIP) and their newsletter is called "The Hog Caller". The myth that gays are attracted to men in uniform and savour the use of their handcuffs and truncheons (!). That it is always the most homophobic men that gay men are least likely to want to bed. That force hockey is the secret lesbian society. And the classic beat story of an officer jumping out from a van and chasing a man across the Clapham Common. When the man gave up out of exhaustion, the officer tapped him on the shoulder and said "You're it now. You have to chase me .." and ran off back to the man.

Upon considering this book for purchase, one must be committed to embrace and learn the concept of turning ingredients into something extraordinary. Of course, most conventional basics are the foundation to most any cookbook. However, David's Burke's book is one that will challenge the better than average home chef to go far beyond what is common kitchen knowledge. This book will literally open doors that you didn't know existed. It will force you to think and understand the purpose and culinary importance of many things that we often take for granted. By doing this, the reader is enriched with an approach that will transform his or her home kitchen into a studio for their next masterpiece. Needless to say, I love this book because it teaches many things beyond a traditional cookbook. It is an insight into a world that is not often seen by many resonably accomplished home chefs(of which I'd like to consider myself). There is no doubt that many of the dishes presented here will be a challenge for some people. However, there is truly no better way to advance to the next level than with the lessons learned here.

The recipes in this book are very complicated for the home cook,especially if you are cooking alone. They represent dishes conceived for and prepared in a restaurant kitchen. I'm a competent cook and the 2 dishes that I made were delicious but quite time consuming, and therefore only suitable for special occasions with much beforehand preparation. We've eaten at the restaurant and the food was wonderful, unfortunately difficult to duplicate, as most of the recipes involve multiple ingredients and several stages of preparation.